HEAD K - MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

Sitting resumed at 3.50 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Column: 2156

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head K (cont.) -

Chinese Language

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied): ( In Mandarin ): Sir, there is an ancient Chinese saying, " zi yi, xing nan ", that is, to know is easy but to do is difficult. For any plans or measures to be successful, the key is in knowing how to specifically and thoroughly implement them, once the direction and principles are determined.

The Chinese Language Pedagogy Reform report is a landmark in the language education in Singapore. Having extensively discussed it in Parliament, we should put our hearts and souls into pushing forward the implementation details as recommended.

I understand that MOE has studied and explored various teaching methods, including "recognising first, writing later". I hope the Minister would enlighten us on the conclusions and suggestions of the Ministry's studies.

Apart from the teaching method, one other very important area is examination. This is because the process and style of examinations tightly restrain the teaching directions of the teachers, their teaching content at the schools and the learning attitude of the students.

For the pedagogy reform to be successful, the mode of examinations should also be thoroughly reformed and be closely linked to the expected outcome of the learning process. The important point is that it has to be more diversified and more innovative. Only then, can we change the present phenomenon whereby students study just to pass their examinations. Once the examination model is defined, the teachers would be able to adapt to the new direction,

Column: 2157

thereby changing their teaching modes and make the students' learning process more varied and diversified, and relevant to daily lives, so as to further enhance the students' interest in learning and change their learning attitude.

However, we must recognise that teachers are the key and soul of the implementation of the reform. I am somewhat worried that up till today, the MOE has not proposed any specific training plan for the teachers so as to prepare the teachers for the implementation of the pedagogy reform. The MOE seems to be "great boast, small roast - much said, but little done". The action does not follow through.

Recently, MOE suddenly announced a reduction in the syllabus and some modules of the Chinese curriculum. This is actually a good measure. However, there seems to be a lack of communication in the implementation, resulting in many teachers, students and parents being caught by surprise. When interviewed on TV, one primary school student said, "All of a sudden, the school deleted the text which I have learnt. How am I going to prepare for the PSLE?" The student's remark illustrates two serious problems: first, the student's learning of the Chinese Language remains tailored at preparing for examinations; and second, it seems that the school, parents and teachers do not know what to do when they suddenly discovered that the teaching modules are reduced.

By right, cutting out the text and teaching materials which are compulsorily fixed as curriculum is a good thing to do. In this way, the teachers could have more flexibility to lead the students in participating in more interesting learning activities, thereby laying a solid foundation for their language. However, when MOE takes the interim measures,

Column: 2158

from the reaction of the primary school student, we can see that we need, first of all, to help the schools prepare the students and parents. I understand that in some schools, they are taking out the Primary 3 to Primary 5 textbooks and teaching them to fill the curriculum time vacated by the reduction in Primary 6 curriculum.

Another preparatory work which cannot be delayed is that since we are going to commence the Chinese Language Pedagogy Reform in the primary schools in 2008, the pre-school sector, ie, kindergarten 1 and 2 classes must also have their curriculum revamped accordingly so as to prepare the students to dovetail into the new primary school reform. Otherwise, it would hamper the reform.

Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah): ( In Mandarin ): MM Lee has said that we must develop a pool of 150 to 200 Chinese elites each year to strengthen our competitiveness.

China is playing an increasingly important role in the world's economy and politics. If we do not have bilingual Chinese elites, the role we play in East Asia and the world in trade and economy will soon be weakened. However, the university admission criteria have been changed. The mother tongue scores will no longer be counted. This has become an obstacle to our goal of developing a pool of Chinese elites. Students who have done Higher Chinese in secondary school may choose not to continue with Higher Chinese at "A" level and JC, since their scores will not be counted for their university admission in the future.

If the number of JC students taking Higher Chinese was reduced, enrolment in the Department of Chinese Studies will also drop. This is detrimental to our plan to nurture a pool of Chinese elites. I would suggest that in order to encourage

Column: 2159

potential students to continue taking Higher Chinese, we should give them some incentives. May I suggest that the students who score "A" or "B" in Higher Chinese and intend to take Chinese in the university be classified as "linguistic talents". The bonus points for mother tongue should be increased from two points to four points. This would attract more students to take Higher Chinese.

In addition, the Minister announced yesterday that the Ministry does not impose restrictions on schools which wish to open primary level Chinese elite classes. This has been welcomed by the parents. May I ask the Minister, currently, how many schools conduct Higher Chinese classes and if the Ministry would consider opening specialised Higher Chinese learning centres, for the convenience of students who wish to pursue Higher Chinese.

Mother Tongue

Dr Ong Seh Hong: ( In Mandarin ): Mr Chairman, yesterday at the Parliament library, I was having a chit-chat with Minister of State, Mr Chan Soo Sen when, full of zest, he suddenly recited an old Chinese poetry:

"Or be a Liaodong hat, my integrity can brave the icy snow;

Or be the command to send out the troop, even the ghosts will weep at the heroic and glorious deaths;

Or be the oar of the boats crossing the river, vehemently conquering the barbarian enemies;

Or be the tablet to hit at the traitors, breaking their heads.�?

I marvel and admire MOS Chan for his mastery of the Chinese classics and his remarkable memory. Fortunately, I could at least remember that this came from the

Column: 2160

" Zheng Qi Ge " (Ode to the Noble Spirit), a heroic poem by the renowned General Wen Tian Xiang of the Song Dynasty.

Coincidentally, I saw Dr Wang Kai Yuen reading a book of ancient poems yesterday. The first page of the book read:

"I have the strength to move the mountain,
But the time and luck are not with me;
Even my faithful horse refuses to move,
My beauty, my beauty, what can I do?"

Immediately I saw, in my mind, Xiang Yu , the Conqueror of Western Chu Kingdom (西 楚 霸 王),

crying out at the bank of the river at the end of his resources. A good man caught in extremely difficult circumstances immersed in love with his beloved concubine. What a sad and heroic picture!

These are two passages of literature from the Chinese classics which are familiar to many Chinese school students of the past. However, this morning, when I read these passages to my young colleagues who came from the SAP schools, they seemed dazed and were completely at a loss.

I do not blame them because over the last two to three decades, after rounds and rounds of reforms to the Chinese education, it seems that the standard of Chinese has gone down again and again. This is an undeniable fact. Our only hope now is on the implementation of the recommendations of the Chinese Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Reform White Paper which we endorsed last year.

In the early part of this year, MOE announced the relaxation of the Chinese language syllabus by cutting out a substantial number of prescribed texts.

Column: 2161

This is worrying to many. By this reduction, the students would be learning less words and it would naturally impact on the learning of the Chinese language. Would it also imply that the standard of Chinese language would slide again?

The key now is whether or not our students and teachers could make use of the time vacated by this relaxation of the syllabus in other ways and deploy more flexible methods of teaching and learning. If the schools and teachers stick to the old methods of teaching Chinese, the standard of Chinese will definitely slide further. I think we should make the learning of Chinese livelier, then, and only then, can the standard of Chinese be raised. I am very glad to see that many schools are deploying all sorts of ingenious way to make the learning of Chinese more relevant to daily lives. On 6th March, Lianhe Zaobao had a comprehensive report on this. Now even the kung fu novels have gone into our curriculum. Some SAP primary schools are going to conduct "Chinese elite classes". I hope that the Ministry of Education will encourage all the schools to do likewise.

Apart from teaching, the examinations should also be livelier. We should not be testing the students on the number of words and phrases they can memorise any more. On the other hand, I think we should make them livelier so that the students would learn how to use Chinese for their daily conversation, to use Chinese to absorb knowledge, to upgrade themselves and to cultivate themselves to become virtuous persons.

The Government wants to cultivate a pool of some 200 Chinese elites each year. I think this is not enough. We should not be confining ourselves to the cultural and educational fields only. We should cast the net wider to take in Chinese elites in the fields of politics, business and

Column: 2162

the arts as well. We should involve even the civil servants and the professionals so that we have a lot of people who know the culture and language of China, in depth and breadth.

Bahasa Malaysia

Mr Chiam See Tong: The Malay language or Bahasa Melayu has a chequered existence in Singapore. In the 1950s, nearly all Singaporeans could speak bazaar Malay. English in those days was not spoken by the common working people, except a minority of Singaporeans who were educated in the English medium schools.

In 1954, the PAP was formed and it proclaimed inter alia in its first party manifesto as follows, "A lingua franca is necessary and moral, political and practical considerations make Malay, rather than English, the obvious choice. The alleged inadequacy of the Malay language as a lingua franca is not disinterested propaganda. The Malay language in Indonesia, freed from Dutch colonial restraints, is rapidly becoming a comprehensive means of expression and communications in science and technology, commerce, industry and the humanities. By contrast, the Malay language in this colonial country remains static."

In 1954, the PAP's aim was to make Malay the lingua franca of Singapore. It nearly succeeded when Singapore joined Malaya to form Malaysia. In 1963, Malay was a compulsory subject in all Government and Government-aided schools, and all civil servants were required to study Malay. They all had to pass Standard One Malay; otherwise they could not be confirmed.

During that period from 1963-1965, when Singapore was part of Malaysia, the promotion and study of the Malay language amongst Singaporeans was at

Column: 2163

its zenith. But the fall of the popularity of the Malay language as its rise was just as fast. After 1965, with the advent of the mother tongue policy in Singapore, where only Malay students were allowed to study Malay as a mother tongue or second language, all Singaporeans, who were non-Malays, did not study Malay and were quite ignorant of the subject. It is sad to know that almost all younger Singaporeans have not had the opportunity to learn basic Malay.

Singapore is in the heart of the Malay world. Indonesia and Malaysia are our close neighbours. They have over 220 million people between them. Their economies, although not as strong as ours, are improving. I think it would benefit Singapore, if Singaporeans could communicate with people in these neighbouring countries in their language.

I am pleased and happy to read in the Straits Times of 18th February 2005 that the Education Ministry is considering an option to let students learn Malay or Bahasa as the third language - read, speak and understand it, without having to master the writing. I think Malay is a language important enough for Singapore to make it a compulsory subject at the elementary level. I would like to know whether the Minister is willing to make ML3 a mandatory, but not examination, subject in our schools.

The Minister of State for Education (Mr Chan Soo Sen): Mr Chairman, Sir, I shall speak first in Mandarin.

( In Mandarin ): Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to thank Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, Mr Ang Mong Seng and Dr Ong Seh Hong for their support for the Chinese language pedagogy reform and the many good suggestions they have made. For many of the issues raised, we have already deliberated very extensively during the debate on the White Paper. So I do not intend to go through them all over again.

Column: 2164

I would just like to report on what we have done after the adoption of the White Paper.

Although this reform would be fully implemented only in the year 2008, that is, four years from now, we have been following up intensively since the debate. Soon after the debate on the reform to the Chinese language pedagogy, we sent a MOE delegation of experts to Hong Kong and China to learn the teaching of Chinese language there. We discovered that from 1999, the concept of "recognise first and write later" has already been a main stream teaching strategy for CL in China and Hong Kong . We were surprised that in such traditional Chinese-speaking society where Chinese was read and written by everyone, they still consider it necessary to adopt this strategy in the teaching of Chinese to the young. I met some of the officials in China and they told me that it was very difficult for the children to learn Chinese using the ancient method. So, now, the new method of "recognising first and writing later" was to ensure that the students would be able to read at a younger age. The younger they start to learn, the younger they would be able to read the Chinese classics and story books. This is exactly the same argument we had when we debated the White Paper.

There are also other points we could learn from PRC's approach in teaching CL. For example, they let the students learn, first of all, the radicals and the basic strokes. And, at the same time, for example, the characters 人 ren (man), 从 cong (follow) and 众 zhong (public) all consist of the basic character 人, except that it appears once, twice and thrice respectively. Likewise, the characters 木 mu (wood), 林 lin (woods) and 森 seng (forest）. As a matter of fact, more often than not, the Chinese characters are formed by combining the radical and the basic strokes in fairly logical patterns.

Column: 2165

They also line up characters which look alike but are totally different in meaning. For example, 清 (clear)，情 (feeling) and 请 (invite). The right hand side is the same but they follow different radicals, hence giving different meanings. For us, who already know Chinese, this may not appear intriguing. But, during our school days, there was no such systematic learning, and we just have to swallow them hook, line and sinker, learn them all by heart first and discover the logic later. Then, there was memorisation and dictation to test how well we remembered them. All these are hard work. If we insist on all these in today's context, we risk losing a lot of interest in the learning of the Chinese language. If we were taught more systematically, perhaps my Chinese would have been better now.

As Mr Yeo Guat Kwang has said, it was important for us to communicate with our teachers. I agree, and we are still in the process of doing so. Since we have not reached out to all teachers yet, I thought I just be general today in replying to Mr Yeo by giving him a maxim in 16 Chinese characters. First, we 多�?�多讲, develop proficiency in oral and aural skills first by listening more and speaking more. Secondly, we go for 有效认字, that is, recognise the characters effectively. After that, 多读多写 - follow with reading and writing, and finally we hope that our students would 学习愉快, enjoy learning the Chinese language.

With this maxim of 16 characters, I could sum up our strategy, that is, we want to listen more, speak more, effectively learning and be happy in our learning. In the not too distant future, and after our discussion with our teachers, we will announce the details.

We have also formed a Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning

Column: 2166

(CPCLL) to rally the strengths of the community so that we would be able to implement and realise all the solutions that were proposed in the White Paper. This Steering Committee comprises people from various quarters who are concerned with the Chinese language and, in fact, a number of our MPs are also members of the Committee.

We have decided in our first meeting that we had done enough talking and it was time for us to get down to action. So we have started five taskforces. One taskforce is for reading and reading materials; the second is to promote writing of Chinese; the third concerns the media; the fourth is to promote cultural exchange, and the fifth is on pre-school Chinese Education. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang heads the taskforce for Chinese in pre-school education. Just now, he talked about the solution for this aspect. I think he could include the excellent suggestions he gave just now for the work of his taskforce. When you want to communicate with the players in this field, do remember what you said in Parliament today.

Dr Ong Seh Hong and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang expressed concern over the teaching of Chinese language. They asked about the reduction of the text and some modules in the Chinese language. I think from this incident, there are a few things that we can learn. First, as Dr Ong Seh Hong has said, when we assess the standard of Chinese of our students, we should not just test whether they can memorise Zheng Qi Ke or Haixia Ke. It should not be based on how many words, phrases or idioms that you can memorise. The important thing is whether or not you have that confidence to use the Chinese language and spoken Mandarin, such as to converse, to read newspapers, and to write reports or file some applications to the relevant authorities. The teaching and learning of Chinese language must be

Column: 2167

down-to-earth. It must be relevant to our daily lives.

I remember during my younger days when we were learning Chinese, it was a different story. We had 92 pieces of selected work to learn and these included Zheng Qi Ke and Xiang Yu Ben Ji where Haixia Ke came from . Our teacher told us to memorise these 92 chapters and the whole examination will be based on them. Today, our examination is not like that. It does not matter what chapters or what passages you have read. You will be examined on how you apply your knowledge of the language. When we cut down on the number of prescribed texts, so long as your practical application of the language is not affected, you will still be able to sit for the examination and get good results. There is therefore no question of cutting down on some prescribed texts, and CL standard is lowered.

The curriculum is to define your study direction and objective. This objective need not be attained by studying the prescribed text. For example, if you read Jin Yong's kung fu novels, and if you can attain the expected outcome of teaching, it is a good thing. The important thing is that we want to give the teachers more free time so that they can put their creativity and ingenuity into action. They are in the frontline. They are the best people to know what the needs of the students are. They want to do their job well. They are all professionals. Therefore, if we give them more space and time, they will be able to use their ingenious ways to teach the students with materials which are more relevant to their daily lives, and it will enhance the students' interest in learning. Such teaching methods would be more effective.

Mr Ang Mong Seng mentioned Higher Chinese. He expressed regret that the

Column: 2168

Chinese results were not taken into consideration for university admission. We had actually discussed this before. For university enrolment, it would have to be assessed on whether or not the student has the aptitude to take the course that he wants to pursue. Perhaps the university can stipulate that if students want to apply for admission to the Chinese Language Department, priority will be given to those who have scored well in Higher Chinese. But if their Chinese is very good and we give them four merit points to get into any faculty whose subjects of study have nothing to do with CL, then I think this will affect the enrolment in the university, and it will be regressive.

In fact, the status of Chinese today is such that we need not go through entry requirement to attract students to learn Chinese. All parents know that Chinese Language is very important. When we are conducting the bi-cultural course, we did not expect some 800 students to apply for the 200 places. In the end, the schools tried their best to accommodate and accepted 300 students. So we can see that the students really know the importance of learning Chinese. We do not need entry requirement to induce the students to learn Chinese. The status of Chinese is so obvious that our students would want to learn Chinese, and the parents would encourage the students to learn Chinese, and to learn it well.

(In English): Since I am unable to reply in Malay, perhaps I will respond to Mr Chiam's question about Bahasa Melayu in English. I did study Malay during those early days. After I joined the civil service, I also went to a Malay class.

We agree with Mr Chiam that Malay language is important. It is an important regional language. But this has got to be seen in context. All the examples cited by

Column: 2169

Mr Chiam were during pre-independent days. The setting at that time was very different. Since then, English has become a working language and our bilingual policy requires all students to study English as well as their mother tongues.

When we debated the White Paper on Chinese Education, the point that it is very difficult for students to master two languages is already established. In fact, the number of students who can master two languages effectively is very small. If, in addition to English and mother tongue, all students are made to study Malay, I fear the pressure on students, teachers and parents may become unbearable. But having said that, allowing students who are already doing well in English and mother tongue to study Malay as an elective subject is already available since the mid-80s. There is a Malay Special programme where students, who are within the top 30% and do very well in mother tongue as well as English, can opt for this special programme at Secondary 1, leading to an examination and qualification at 'O' level. The equivalent standard is Standard 2, which is slightly higher than Standard 1. There are about 300 students who are doing this subject.

This particular programme will continue, and we are confident that when people begin to understand that to be proficient in an additional language is like holding an additional passport, more would study Malay language, as in the Malay Special programme.

We also have schools who, on their own initiative, have initiated some conversational Malay programmes for their pupils. We, in the Ministry of Education, support these initiatives on the part of the schools.

As far as the civil service is concerned, the Civil Service College still

Column: 2170

offers basic conversational Malay course. Civil servants who need to study Malay can enrol in this course. Of course, there are also public officers whose jobs require them to be more proficient in the Malay language, such as some SAF or Ministry of Foreign Affairs officers. The Ministries have their own programmes for them to learn the Malay language. In other words, all the channels available for those who want to study Malay are already there.

Finally, I need to respond to Mr Ang Mong Seng's point about the elite Chinese programme.

(In Mandarin): This is a new initiative by Tao Nan School. We do not know how our students and parents would take to the programme. If the students spend more time learning Chinese, then they will have less time for English. The result could be that their standard of Chinese would be raised, probably at the expense of their standard of English being lowered. So let us see how it goes. More importantly, it depends on the parents. If the response is good, the Hokkien Huay Kuan has already said that they intend to extend the project to other Hokkien Huay Kuan schools. If other schools find this project a good idea, they may also conduct similar programmes. MOE is prepared to let them try these out.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang: (In Mandarin) : Sir, a point of clarification. The Minister said that we have four years to do things slowly. But I have just worked it out and it is only three years and three months. We would start in January 2008. I do not know how the Minister did his calculation.

The more important point is that on pre-school education, we have the responsibility to push and promote pre-school education. I have been made a committee Chairman. I will just stick my neck out and do it. But, to a large extent, this pre-school education depends very much on the Ministry of Education,

Column: 2171

because there is no framework provided by the MOE. To many operators, they do not have any standard to follow. Unless the Ministry can spell out the clear standards, there will be no guiding principle or framework to control this kind of educational work. On the other hand, the operators of the pre-school establishments will have to grope in the dark.

The Minister also said that our examination system is diversified. Even up till today our students, primary or secondary, are still learning by rote. Why is it so?

Mr Chan Soo Sen: (In Mandarin) : So, it is three years and three months. We had a lot of preparatory work to do, such as introducing teaching methods, developing teaching materials, developing the supplementary reading materials and training the teachers. These are important foundation work which we must ensure are properly done. So we need time. So give us some time. We understand the Member's keenness in wanting to start implementing the recommendations of the White Paper. The Ministry is also keen to do so. We do not want to be accused of having all talks and no action. But to rush without having properly done the vital preparatory work would have been irresponsible and unprofessional.

Next is the question on the CL curriculum framework of pre-school education. If we do not have one, and since the Member is the Chairman of the Pre-School sub-committee, then he can take the opportunity to work out the framework. In his committee, there are principals of kindergartens and inspectors of school. If his sub-committee can fix the framework, it will be helpful for others.

Third, on examinations. It is also within the scope of work that we have to do in the three-and-a-half years. We understand that examination formats

Column: 2172

determine what our teachers teach, and what our students learn. What to examine and what to learn - this is the crux of the matter that we are discussing. We have three years and three months. We will be gradually doing all the things that we have decided upon. We will discuss and consult the teachers and then make the necessary announcement.

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin) : Sir, the Minister has not answered my question. How many primary and secondary schools are conducting the Higher Chinese classes? Some people complained to me that when their children went to ordinary schools, they were not given the opportunity to take Higher Chinese. I have already conveyed this concern to the Minister.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: (In Mandarin) : If Mr Ang is talking about schools offering Higher Chinese, I do not have a list of schools with me. I can let him have the list later.

Talking about the Chinese elite class in primary schools, there is only one in Tao Nan School.

Dr Ong Seh Hong: (In Mandarin) : Sir, the Minister said just now that after reducing the number of prescribed texts, the teachers could make use of the extra time available for other activities. In this way, will our Chinese standard be lowered or improved? We have seen from this Report that various schools have taken measures to make Chinese a living language, but this is confined to just a few schools. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry of Education has categorically informed all schools that they must do all these things and take all these measures.

The Minister said that the Ministry was considering the framework for examinations. I have already made a suggestion to MOE that when we are

Column: 2173

examining the Chinese Language, there are three principles to be considered. One is to examine our students on whether they could use the Chinese they learn to live. Second, whether they could use it to study and acquire knowledge. Third, whether it helps them to be a better person and mould their character. These are the suggestions that I have made to the Minister. I hope he will accept my suggestions.

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair]

4.30 pm

Mr Chan Soo Sen: (In Mandarin): We will consider these three suggestions. Another one is on the examination framework. How do we make use of the time and space vacated from the relaxation of the curriculum? The Ministry will not micro-manage and tell the teachers how to make use of the extra time. Different schools, different students have different needs and different demands. The teachers know this better than the Ministry. Some schools may want to use more time to teach the prescribed texts, while some students may want to use the spare time to read newspapers and write reports. Mr Yeo mentioned that some teachers use the time to revise the Secondary 2 and 3 lessons. All these arrangements will depend on the needs of the students.

Talking about relaxation of control, a person who has been tied up for a long period of time will probably be unable to walk properly when he is suddenly freed. But, after some warming up, he will be able to adjust himself and find his proper steps. So, not being able to walk properly initially does not mean that he cannot get back to walking properly in the future. After some warming up, he will walk well, and enjoy the freedom of movement.

Column: 2174

Members would have read the newspaper reports on how some of our teachers used creative ideas to encourage students to participate more actively in the learning process. Such spirit of innovation and creativity are what we want to encourage. So let us give them more space and time so that our teachers can bring out their creative talent for the good of our students. I am confident about our CL teachers. Those newspaper reports are examples that come to the ears of the newspapers. It is not exhaustive. There are many more such examples of creative teaching. There are yet many schools with a lot of creative ideas, albeit not reported in the media. It does not mean that they are not doing it.

The Chairman: I think we should move on. Mr Zainudin Nordin.

Malay Language and Tamil Language Reviews

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, the announcement of the Malay Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Review was made late last year. I would like to ask if the Committee would be able to provide us with an update on the current status of the review.

Sir, with the recent developments and the heightened interest in the learning of the Malay Language, and as more begin to realise the importance and benefits of learning the Malay Language, it would be a pity and unfortunate if the Malay students are still oblivious of these facts. I would just like to qualify that, though this problem is still not a big one, there are obvious concerns because we have seen more and more Malay students losing mastery and interest in the learning of the mother tongue. While waiting for the review to be completed in August 2005, are there any interim measures or specific efforts that MOE can implement and address these disturbing trends and concerns?

Column: 2175

Mr Ong Ah Heng: (In Mandarin): Sir, as Mr Zainudin mentioned about the Malay language problem, I would like to ask about the progress of the Chinese Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Reform report which we endorsed last year. I am very glad to note that MOE has also set up review committees for the Tamil Language and Malay Language. I would like to ask the Minister what is the progress of these review committees.

For the Malay and Indian parents, what kind of expectations do they have? As a multi-racial society, members of the Chinese community are also concerned with the problems of the Indian and Malay parents.

Can the Minister please enlighten us?

Mr S Iswaran (West Coast): Sir, the announcement of the Tamil Language (TL) Review last year was welcomed by the community. In general, it has also raised expectations. It is done because, notwithstanding the numerous reviews that had been done in the past and MOE's ongoing efforts to improve the teaching and learning of the language, the fact remains that many parents and students feel that the teaching and learning of Tamil Language in schools is not in step with the realities of modern Singapore. I have had the opportunity to first hand look at some of the materials and requirements at the primary level. I find that, even in the early primary levels, there is not that much difference in the expectation between what we want from TL, and I suspect that it might be the case for other languages and English. So the review takes particular importance and significance in this light.

There are three aspects that I wish to query the Ministry on. The first is on how the expectation of the Tamil Language standard to be attained be established. Would we be looking not just at the

Column: 2176

standards that are already in place today in schools, but also the reality on the ground and the environment that our students are in? I think, most importantly, the time that is required for them to achieve a certain level of competence in the language.

The second is on completing the loop in the review. In other words, look not just at curriculum review but also at the standards in the examinations of the landmark at national levels, and then what is happening in the schools in the intervening years where examinations are set, and then that percolates down to school assignments and assessments. I think that is an important part of this review.

Finally, on timing. The points have been raised in the context of other reviews. It is essential that this review be completed this year and there should be some immediate benefits to the schools and to the students in the schools from next year onwards. It is scant comfort to know that three years from now, the curriculum will be modified to make it easier for students.

Developing Rootedness and Patriotism in our Studies

Mr Alexander Chan Meng Wah: Sir, in an IPS survey of 1999 involving a random sample of 1,451 Singaporean citizens between 15 and 64 of age, it was noticed that Singaporeans were generally very positive and very strongly patriotic to the country when abstract concepts, like pride, sense of belonging, and what Singapore means to them were mentioned. On the other hand, questions regarding more economic and pragmatic issues, like job loss, defending the nation in periods of tension, returned less wholly positive answers. There was also a strong positive correlation between age of respondents and national pride score.

Column: 2177

Apparently, the younger the Singaporeans, the lesser their national pride. In my view, strong feelings for Singapore are built up over a long period of time, reinforced by positive experiences but also damaged by unfavourable experiences. This just means that the process must start from young and in school.

During school age, what happens? Our children are managed and educated by our schools, first, in the primary school for six years, and then potentially by a different institution, a secondary school for four years, and then another set of institutions - the JCs, ITE or polytechnics and, subsequently, perhaps the universities. Or, if you are a Singaporean male, you are then handed over to the SAF. Thereafter, they are released to the workplace. In each case, the responsible organisation, more or less, fully consumes the available time for its primary purposes, whether that be for education, in the case of schools, or for military training. This leaves very little precious time for other purposes, such as building community relations, enhancing rootedness and love for Singapore and, furthermore, developing a more than superficial understanding about our own and neighbouring cultures. In fact, our system insulates and segments, perhaps, inadvertently.

Sir, I think we already lack the number and the variety of different organisations' activities and substantial linkages for our school children into the community. We do not have a surfeit of organisations that can be a kind of a common platform, a familiar vehicle to carry children from childhood into young adulthood, other than our shopping centres. The idea here is that our children can be involved in such organisations on a regular basis that will become potential anchors to enhance rootedness. I applaud the Minister for leading the rapid and widespread

Column: 2178

transformation of our education system to inject more positive experiences with its renewed emphasis on teaching, less learning more, the changes to mother tongue teaching, the call for more sports, a new admission system, beefing up the teaching cadre and opening up of school sports facilities to the public. However, I wish to ask the Minister for Education what MOE is doing to develop more team work, a stronger sense of community, nationhood, regional understanding and, also, how our schools can be better plugged into our community for both students and staff.

Sexuality Education

Mr Ong Ah Heng: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to talk about sexuality education in schools and find out what is the progress in this aspect. According to a newspaper report, there are some 50 young girls who got pregnant before marriage in Singapore each year. Has the standard of morality among our younger people gone down? Has this anything to do with our opening up? I would like to ask the Minister what kind of sexuality education has been conducted in the schools. Is there any review on the contents of these courses? Is he happy with the progress in the teaching of sexuality education in schools?

Three days ago, I saw a report in the CCTV that from Suzhou onwards, the schools in China have already included sexuality education in their primary school curriculum. Now, it has been extended to Shanghai, Shenyang and Guangzhou. I would like to ask the Minister whether MOE has conducted any survey on the family backgrounds of our students of each age group, and their views on pre-marital sex. In China, it is reported that HIV cases are increasing at an alarming rate. The matter is getting more and more serious. The spread of HIV has created a tremendous impact on the future of mankind. I am not suggesting that we

Column: 2179

copy from China. I believe we can step up the introduction of sexuality education in our schools and include it in the formal school curriculum.

Students from Poor Family

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, recently we have seen a worrying trend of increasing number of parents from poor families who have approached us for assistance to pay for arrears in school fees and other educational fees. Most of these requests are coming from students of low-income families who are attending schools without proper breakfast or even pocket money to sustain their day in school. We all understand that high quality education cost money and students' subsidies are essential to improve their quality and opportunities. However, in addition to the subsidies, how can MOE assist further these students and families? We do not want these students to be disadvantaged because of their situation. I think we should see this help as an investment in the future of the students.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Hawazi Daipi): Sir, in response to questions posed by Mr Ong Ah Heng, Mr Iswaran and Mr Zainudin, allow me to provide Members on the progress of the Malay Language and Tamil Language Reviews. As Members may be aware, MOE embarked on reviews of the Curriculum and the Pedagogy of the Malay Language and Tamil Language in January this year. The Malay Language Review Committee is chaired by Assoc. Prof. Dr Hadijah Rahmat of the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, and the Tamil Language Review Committee is chaired by Dr N Varaprasad, Chief Executive Officer of the National Library Board.

Both committees have consulted language users from a range of organisations, including pre-schools,

Column: 2180

schools, Institutes of Higher Learning, media industry, the National Library Board and private organisations. They will also be seeking views from the public soon on how the teaching and learning of the Malay Language and the Tamil Language can be improved in our schools.

Two surveys were commissioned by MOE for the Malay Language and the Tamil Language Reviews involving 3,200 Malay Language and 2,800 Tamil Language students respectively. The preliminary findings of both surveys suggest that similar to the Chinese language survey, there is a generational shift in the language use at home among students.

The proportion of parents who speak to their child mainly in Malay is about two-fifths at Secondary 4 (or 39%) compared to about a quarter (or 24%) at Primary 2. Similarly, for the Tamil Language, the proportion of parents of Tamil students who speak to their child mainly in Tamil is about slightly more than a quarter (or 28%) at Secondary 4 compared to a fifth (or 20%) at Primary 2.

This shift was also observed for the Chinese community in the recent review of the Chinese Language. The proportion of parents who speak to their child mainly in Chinese is about three-fifths (or 59%) at Secondary 4 compared to slightly less than two-fifths (or 37%) at Primary 2.

In a nutshell, there is a generational shift in the use of language. More parents with older children speak to their children in their vernacular languages and in comparison more parents speaking to younger children speak in a mix of English and the Mother Tongue Languages.

A large majority of students surveyed said that they liked learning their mother tongue. The proportion of students who liked learning Malay Language was the highest among the three mother tongue

Column: 2181

languages. However, the interest in the learning of the subject decreases with age for students of the three communities.

4.45 pm

The preliminary findings suggest that the language used at home may affect students' level of interest and their ability to learn their mother tongue. The survey findings will be useful inputs for the two review committees. In answer to Mr Iswaran, this is another way for us to gauge how we can pitch the curriculum, design activities, change examination formats and so on, other than talking to and getting feedback from the respective communities.

The committees will propose how we can design the curriculum to better match the needs of the students with different language backgrounds and abilities, and also how to teach and assess to enthuse these students. The committee's recommendations will be considered by MOE. If the recommendations can be implemented immediately, we will do so. Some recommendations may require time before we can implement them, such as curriculum development and teacher training. Nevertheless, Members can be assured that we will see how best and how quickly we can implement these recommendations, in a coherent and effective manner, so that our students can benefit from them.

Both the Malay and Tamil Language reviews are progressing well and should be completed by August this year.

Mr Zainudin Nordin also asked about how MOE is helping Malay students who are weak in their spoken Malay. The importance of oral competencies is reflected in the Malay Language syllabus, instructional materials, teaching methods and assessment. Our teachers engage

Column: 2182

students in interaction using an array of language activities which includes story telling, debate, singing and poetry recitation. Schools also organise Malay Language activities, such as camps and cultural events, to encourage oral communication. We look forward to more suggestions from the Malay Language Review Committee on how we can further enhance the oral competency of our students.

Sir, on Mr Ong Ah Heng's questions about the effectiveness of our sexuality education programme, this is also a concern to us. Allow me to update Members on its implementation in schools.

Sexuality issues and norms have become more complicated today in a globalised world that is undergoing rapid changes. It is a situation not peculiar only to Singapore, as other countries that are becoming more open and cosmopolitan also face this same challenge. We will therefore need the family and the wider community to play their part to shape the sexuality attitudes and behaviours of our students.

At MOE, we have taken a proactive approach by implementing an age-appropriate sexuality programme in our schools. This programme adopts a holistic approach towards the issue of sexuality, including the physical, emotional, social, intellectual and ethical dimensions of sexuality. Sex education, on the other hand, focuses solely on the physical dimension and is usually taught to married couples. Mr Ong cited the example of schools in some cities in China which have introduced what he termed as sex education. I am not sure whether it is really sex education or sexuality education. However, if this is useful for us to take a look at their experiences and how they design the curriculum and programmes for their pupils, we will do so and see what we can learn from them.

Column: 2183

We aim to provide students with accurate knowledge about sexuality, inculcate sound values and equip students with relevant skills to build healthy relationships and make responsible decisions regarding their sexual behaviour. The sexuality education programme is premised on the importance of the family, and respect of the values and beliefs of the different ethnic and religious communities on sexuality issues. The programme has been well received in our schools. Teachers felt that it was comprehensive and well thought through. The students felt that the lessons provided a legitimate platform for them to discuss the issues that were commonly considered “taboo�?, but they would like to know.

Teenage pregnancies and abortion are complex issues. Lack of family support, low self-esteem, sexual abuse and a lack of understanding of responsibilities in relationships are also factors associated with teenage pregnancy.

A survey by MOE in 2004 to gauge the impact of the sexuality education programme was conducted on eight secondary schools and covered over 2,000 pupils. Students' responses to pre- and post-programme questionnaires indicate a significant increase in their understanding of sexuality matters, including the negative consequences of teenage sexual activities. There is also a generally positive shift in the students' attitude towards sexuality matters.

The sexuality education programme is still in its early stage of implementation, with the post-secondary package only implemented in JCs last year. We will be evaluating the programme at the upper primary and the JC and Centralised Institute (CI) level this year.

Sexuality education is not an easy subject to teach. If we over-teach the subject, we may not get the right results.

Column: 2184

It is also much more than knowledge about sexual reproduction. It is about attitudes and beliefs towards sexuality.

Schools need to be sensitive to the students' developmental needs and their level of understanding in order to engage them. Above all, our teachers need to use effective teaching methods to bring the subject alive to impact the students. We will continually review our programme to ensure that it meets the challenges in our society.

Let me assure Members that MOE agrees totally with the importance of sexuality education for our students. While schools and family provide the primary contexts for the inculcation of positive attitudes towards sexuality matters, the larger communities, other Government agencies, and the media, can also play an effective role in influencing these positive behaviours and attitudes. Together, we can help our youths make more informed and responsible choices.

Mr Zainudin Nordin asked what MOE is doing to assist parents who cannot afford pocket money and textbooks for their children in schools and whether these students will be disadvantaged because of their situation. The MOE Financial Assistance Scheme provides for students from low-income households. This scheme grants waiver of school fees and part of the miscellaneous fees, and provides free textbooks to students too.

In 2004, this scheme had benefited a total of 14,646 students, compared to 11,471 in 2003 and 7,387 in 2002. The larger number of students means that more are benefiting from the scheme. For this year, as of February, schools have already processed and approved over 12,000 applications. This number covers 9% of students living in HDB one to three-room flats, and 2% of those staying in four to five-room flats. We estimate the

Column: 2185

total financial assistance to be given this year to be about $1.5 million.

Students can use the funds in their Edusave accounts to pay for their second-tier miscellaneous fees. This year, the Edusave Pupils Fund contribution rate by the Government for students at the primary level has been increased by $10 from $160 to $170, and for students at the secondary level by $40 from $160 to $200. As announced by PM in his Budget Statement, there will also be a once-off top-up of $100 to the Edusave accounts of every primary and secondary pupil.

The School Advisory or School Management Committees will also provide additional support to needy pupils which may take the form of pocket money, settlement of fee arrears, free meals, stationery and uniforms. In 2004, the School Advisory Committees provided $3 million worth of financial assistance and bursaries.

The Community Development Councils administer a number of social assistance schemes to help low-income families and families that need help to tide over a difficult period. Such assistance is necessary so that our students do not have to stop schooling to support their families. Dr Warren Lee spoke about this during the Budget debate and I want to reassure him that students who had left school prematurely can seek re-admission into our school system if they want to continue with their education.

Corporate organisations, such as SembCorp Marine, also provide financial grant to assist low-income households with schooling children to purchase school textbooks, uniforms and stationery. SembCorp Marine has done these for a few years and has been working directly with the Ministry of Education in the past two years. Taken together, these financial

Column: 2186

assistance schemes from MOE and the wider community ensure that no child is denied an education on account of financial difficulties.

Dr Ong Seh Hong suggested that we teach Religious Knowledge to primary school pupils to promote racial harmony. We agree with Dr Ong on the need to promote racial harmony in school. This is currently done through Civics and Moral Education (CME), where students are exposed to the different religious and cultural customs, beliefs and practices in Singapore. The purpose is to foster the value of respect for others in our students from the primary to pre-university level, rather than impart religious beliefs to them, which should not be the role of our schools. As a secular state, we feel that this approach is more appropriate and coherent in promoting racial harmony.

MOE has set up the Committee on Strengthening Racial Harmony in Schools, which I chair, with the aim of helping schools broaden and deepen inter-racial understanding and mixing in their schools. The committee comprises representatives from MOE, schools, parent support groups, and community leaders who have been nominated by CDCs. For example, the Racial Harmony Day on 21st July each year is one key event among the many activities and programmes carried out by schools to promote inter-racial understanding.

Mr Alex Chan asked whether MOE encourages students' participation in community organisations and also how MOE is developing a sense of rootedness, patriotism and, increasingly, a regional identity in our students. We fully agree with him that it is imperative for us to develop in our students a strong sense of belonging to their community and to the country.

In schools, we strive to impart these national instincts and values through our

Column: 2187

National Education programmes, Co-Curricular Activities (CCAs) and Community Involvement programmes (CIP). National Education is also infused in subjects, such as Civics and Moral Education, as well as Social Studies. Teachers use varied teaching approaches, such as discussions, case studies and Learning Journeys. Pre-university students also attend dialogue sessions with senior civil servants on topics such as economic competitiveness and governance. So there is a wide range of activities and programmes for us to impart a sense of rootedness and belonging to the country in our students.

Members will agree that teaching more does not mean learning more. Values are often “caught�? and not “taught�?. National Education has to be authentic and meaningful, experienced and felt by the students. Therefore, opportunities have to be created for students to undergo experiences that will help them internalise these values. Co-curricular activities play a key role. And here I fully agree with Mr Alex Chan on the importance of giving our students opportunities to connect with organisations out there, including through sports organisations. Through CCAs, our students form life-long friendships. Sports is a particularly good CCA to bond students and their community.

Mr Alex Chan may be pleased to note that MOE encourages schools to establish links with sports clubs. Clubs, such as the Singapore Cricket Club, Singapore Recreation Club, Ceylon Sports Club and the Singapore Indian Association, organise youth development programmes to nurture and train young sports talents. There are also student hockey players in schools, such as Tampines Junior College and Yuhua Secondary, who play for local clubs in the Singapore Hockey Federation League tournament. So there are opportunities for them, and the students have taken up the opportunities to play with the big boys, so to say, in the league

Column: 2188

and, hopefully, that will give them the connection to the larger community too.

The Community Involvement Programme provides yet another platform for students to build connections with their wider community. Some of our students

conduct reading programmes in libraries, while others visit old folks' homes to interact with the elderly residents and help with the maintenance of these homes. Our schools have also collaborated with various organisations to broaden and deepen students' involvement in community outreach projects. Such organisations include Community Clubs, Community Development Councils, the National Youth Council and the Singapore International Foundation.

5.00 pm

Nevertheless, we understand that the transmission of national instincts and values to our students is a long process. The family, the community and the society play no less a critical role in shaping these values in our young. I do not think this is a role that we should only give to the schools.

Perhaps, the real measure of success of our efforts lies in how our students instinctively respond to a national or regional crisis. If the positive and caring spirit of our students and Singaporeans during SARS or the tsunami disaster is of any indication, I am confident that we are on the right track in preparing future citizens of Singapore. Working together with parents and the community, our schools will continue to strive to ensure that our students are imbued with a sense of love, loyalty and belonging to the community and to Singapore.

Mr Iswaran: Mr Chairman, I appreciate the Senior Parliamentary Secretary's assurance that the Ministry would implement the recommendations of the review that can be implemented

Column: 2189

immediately. But I seek a more specific assurance, not something so generic, because past experience has shown that three elements have to be synchronised - curriculum design, national examination standards, school-based teaching and standards of tests or any other assessments in schools. These must work in tandem. If not, what tends to happen is that, whatever we do in terms of curriculum design, the teachers will continue to teach based on examination expectations.

My question specifically is whether the Review Committee has been asked to anticipate this need and recommend implementation on that basis.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Yes, the two Committees will conclude their work in August. We will have time to review their recommendations. Those which can be implemented immediately and quickly, we will try to do immediately. But there are issues like curriculum design and development and examinations which may need some time. In principle, I can assure Mr Iswaran and Members that we will try to implement as quickly as we can in all respects of the review - curriculum, examinations, as well as pedagogy activities, ie, the teaching methods. We will start with those which are easy to implement and easy to improve. But some areas of efforts, like teacher training and curriculum design, may take a bit of time to finetune. I am not very sure how quickly we can implement all the recommendations. But I can assure Members, including Mr Iswaran, that we will try to do that as quickly as we can. But we have to do that comprehensively and cohesively so that our students can benefit and that we do not have to review the new curriculum and the examination format sooner than necessary in future.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, I am very happy to hear that the schools are giving

Column: 2190

more assistance to the poor families. Why is it that parents do feel compelled to ask for help from the Members of Parliament if the assistance is already available in schools? Why not make it such that if the fees are not being paid for a few months, automatically some assistance is being rendered. I would just like to ask for some comments from the Ministry.

The other point is the question of timing of help. I know parents are very concerned when it comes to the end and the beginning of the year, the time for getting school uniforms, payment of fees and so on. Could it be done earlier so that when there is a need for help, the parents are not overwhelmed by such concerns?

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, I suggest that Mr Zainudin ask the parents why they need to approach their MPs to seek help to pay for the school fees which they have in arrears.

Schools provide assistance to pupils who need assistance. Schools will have to conduct an investigation. The school will first ask pupils to pay the fees. Where they have chalked up arrears, very often the school will advise parents to come for a discussion. I do not know what happened to parents who did not approach the school and why they did not approach the school for assistance.

But having said that, the 12,000 pupils who have approached their schools and whose applications have been considered could not have met their MPs to get financial assistance to pay for the school fees. A great majority of them must have approached their schools directly.

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen (Nominated Member): Sir, I declare my interest as the spokesperson for a programme that offers help to teenage pregnant mothers. I would just like to ask the SPS, since we have

Column: 2191

agreed that sexuality education is more complex now than ever before, how are teachers basically being trained to tackle this issue. I am just wondering whether a more discussive approach instead of really teaching it will actually help students have a better understanding of the issue and, on a personal capacity, for them to actually approach their teachers. So that helps them to understand this whole issue better.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, we approach this programme in a different way for different levels of students. Let me start by saying that we are providing more teaching resources to schools so that we can counsel and teach pupils issues of sexuality.

We have trained teachers to teach sexuality education. We are providing more trained teacher counsellors to schools. For example, from this year, counselling provision in schools will be further enhanced. We will be sending trained teacher counsellors to all secondary schools this year. On top of that, we will also be sending full-time school counsellors to schools. All secondary schools will have full-time school counsellors by next year. We will do so over a period of three years for primary schools and JCs. On top of that, we also engage a team of professionals in helping students with sexuality problems. These comprise specialists in guidance, psychologists, medical and legal professions too.

How do we teach students on issues of sexuality? Generally, we teach students through subjects like CME so that they understand issues of sexuality. The Member asked whether we use discussive approach. Yes, we do that, especially for students at a higher level, ie, at the JC level. Students will understand through discussions, through viewing videos together and through analysing situations.

Column: 2192

As I have said, we are providing more trained teachers to schools, including JCs, in the next one to three years at different levels so that we can enhance further sexuality education in our schools. I hope that answers the Member's questions.

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang (Nominated Member): Sir, I wish to pick up on a point made by the hon. Member, Mr Alex Chan regarding rootedness and belonging. One thing, which may be an unintended consequence of our Education Ministry's reorganisation and shifting of schools, is that we have lost some sense of belonging and rootedness.

Just the other day, I found out Telok Kurau School is now in Ubi. I mentioned in this House that River Valley School is quite far from River Valley and Raffles Institution has been in three places in recent history. I think it is very important that if we want to have people establish roots here and, have a sense of belonging, it is important to respect place and name, and have these institutions endured so that the school kids, when they graduate, will know where they belong and will go back, and feel a sense of belonging. Moreover, these schools will be rooted in their respective communities. But we shuffle them here and there, and change their names. Crescent Girls' School is ---

The Chairman: So, what is your question?

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang: He knows what I mean.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Prof. Png talks about geographical rootedness. What is more important is the spirit of rootedness, not geographical rootedness of our pupils to the schools they belong to or they have their education in.

We have seen in many schools the spirit of togetherness and the sense of identity, which have been developed over

Column: 2193

the years through games and achieving common objectives together. Sir, it does not matter where the school is located. If River Valley High is located in Pandan Loop or Teban Gardens, the spirit of River Valley High remains intact. If RI is now located in Bishan, the spirit of RI remains the same as 50 years ago. I do not come from RI, but I understand that spirit of the rootedness among former RI pupils.

I do not think it is necessarily significant to develop rootedness among pupils on the basis of geographical location.

Mr Alexander Chan Meng Wah: I thank Mr Hawazi for the explanation of the many activities that the Ministry of Education is doing. I fully appreciate that. Just as much as the education process totally immerses the students in the content and experience, this other thing about CCA and CIP is, we have more of a "smell the flowers" approach at this time. I hope that in years to come, it is going to go beyond that. Then you do not have a situation, like the one which was brought up by the hon. Member, Mdm Ho Geok Choo, where you have a disabled person being ostracised within his own community. I hope that we can go truly down into rootedness, not about the physical thing but about the spirit.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, I agree that CCA and CIP have done a lot in inculcating that spirit of service, that sense of belonging to not only the school but also to the larger community. I think they can certainly do more. As we have seen through our experiences handling SARS, the way the students and the community, in general, responded to the development in our neighbouring countries following the tsunami disaster, we have reasons to be proud in how that spirit of togetherness and sense of belonging to ourselves, being Singaporeans, have developed over the years.

Column: 2194

It is always tempting to cite anecdotal examples and we always remember unpleasant examples. I think it is not fair to schools, in general, for us to just cite one example and then generalise it. There are examples of students who help others through buddy reading programme. There are those who help the physically handicapped. There are many good examples which have been highlighted by the press. So I do not think it is fair to our education development, in general, to our students, teachers and our institutions to cite a single example and generalise it.

I appreciate Mr Chan's views on the importance of CCA and CIP, and we have done a lot for our students. They might have smelt the flowers, but we have already introduced that liking towards flowers. Why not? In my personal view, if at the end of the day, only 1% of each student cohort continues to do community service seriously after they have grown up, I think we have achieved something. 4,000 to 5,000 Singaporeans of each cohort doing community service is not bad at all. So the cumulative effect must be good for Singapore.

5.15 pm

The Chairman: All right, I allow one last question. Prof. Ong Soh Khim.

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim (Nominated Member): Sir, I have three points with regard to Minister Tharman's earlier reply. The first one is on the topic of streaming.

The Chairman: Can you keep them to the end of the debate, when time permits? We are covering topics currently under debate. All right, we will move on.

Teachers

Mr Gan Kim Yong: (In Mandarin) : In the past few years, our education system has undergone great changes in order that our

Column: 2195

students could be taught according to their talent and potential. This basic principle is correct. However, I feel that for our education system to be thoroughly successful, it would still depend very much on our teachers. Therefore, we should review our teaching service.

First of all, the Ministry of Education should evaluate the workload of our teachers. Now that they are required to teach less and make the students learn more, the traditional teaching methods can no longer be used. The teachers have to be innovative and deploy creative ways to teach, and have more time to interact with the students. They also need more time to prepare their teaching materials. With the heavy workload they are having now, they may not have the space to carry out this innovation.

Second, the curriculum has also been changed and reformed. Teachers need to be trained to adapt to them. I think we should have the teachers' consent because some of them grew up in the old system. We should listen to their views and adjust our policies.

Third, perhaps we should provide our teachers with more administrative assistants so that they could concentrate on teaching. This may incur more cost, but I think it is worth it, for the benefit of our next generation. Teachers are very important in this reform of the system. No matter how good our policies are, we need to have dedicated teachers so that the reform could be successful. We always say that teachers are the engineers of our souls. I think we should improve their working condition.

The Chairman: Mr Charles Chong is not here.

Schools of the Future

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Mr Chairman, Sir, I would just like to describe a scene. The

Column: 2196

scene is familiar. A teacher stands at the front of her room, children sit in the centre, their seats arranged in rows or semi-circles. There is a chalk-board or white-board, a wall map and a globe. This could be a classroom in 2005, 1995, 1859 or even 1795. Although the details may vary, school design has seen few changes in the past 200 years.

Mr Chairman, Sir, with the aim to provide our children with a balanced and well-rounded education, develop them to their full potential and nurture them into good citizens, we continue to invest heavily in public education infrastructure and facilities. However, are we designing our schools to be education factories? Have we looked into aspects of architectural design, space planning, natural flow and ergonomics? We should be concerned with not only the software but also the hardware. The infrastructure and the facilities must align with MOE's vision. To encourage creativity and balance, the hardware need not necessarily be hard and cold and we should factor in design aspects that create a soft and warm environment, which is more inviting, conducive and reflect the new thrust in our education system.

In this respect, Sir, may I propose that MOE be involved and work closely with the designers and architects, who share the vision of MOE, to develop our future schools that are progressive and modern in nature. Study has shown that students' achievement and behaviour relate to the physical building conditions and overcrowding has an effect on their performance. Good facilities appear to be an important pre-condition for student learning.

Programme for Rebuilding and Improving Existing Schools (PRIME)

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang: Sir, my point is somewhat related to the point made by the hon. Member Mr Zainudin.

Column: 2197

PRIME is a programme, worth over $1 billion, to upgrade schools. One of the key deliverables is larger classrooms to fit enhanced technology. However, since PRIME was initiated some years ago, the Ministry has decided to recruit more teachers and reduce the student/teacher ratio and so, therefore, classes are going to be smaller, with fewer students.

In this case, could the Ministry not realign PRIME so that there would be less need to enlarge classrooms and money could be saved or used for other purposes?

Special Education Schools

Mr Iswaran: Mr Chairman, Sir, this is regarding special education. Today, the way we have special education seems to be in two sort of quite disparate models.

The first is the kind of integration model where students with special needs go to mainstream schools where they have the ability to keep up or cope with the curriculum there and, normally, they have to take some kind of test or be assessed before they could be admitted. This is an ideal model, particularly from the special needs students' perspective, but very few could actually benefit because of the high demands of our mainstream system.

The other model at the other end of the spectrum is the customised special education schools, which cater to the specific needs of students with special educational requirements. It has the advantage of being able to cater to a far wider ability range among such students. But the disadvantage remains that it is decoupled from the mainstream and from students who are really part and parcel of the society that students with special needs and mainstream students are integrated within.

Column: 2198

I think it is generally acknowledged that interaction between the two groups is desirable and of mutual benefit to both sides, both in terms of character development, to some extent pedagogic development and, in general, part of our own social and civil consciousness of being part of the society.

So the question really is: can we pursue some other model or some other means of promoting this kind of integration? One of the thoughts that has been thrown around in the past is the idea of co-locating special schools and mainstream schools, so that they are physically on adjacent premises. What that allows is for integration for certain aspects of the curriculum, be it, for example, in art or physical education or some of the ECA and social activities, and yet allowing for separation for the pursuit of academic matters and so on. The advantage of such a system is that the interaction amongst the students would occur quite naturally and would not have to be orchestrated in the sense that there is actually a special excursion or event when the two groups of students come together to go wherever it is. So the question I have really is whether the Ministry is pursuing this model and, if so, what is the state of development of that idea.

I raised this under the Ministry of Education because it is not clear to me whether this initiative, if undertaken, would fall under the Ministry of Education or under MCYS, or whether it requires a joint response.

Compulsory Education for Children with Disabilities

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: Sir, when the Compulsory Education Act (CEA) was introduced in 2000, children with

Column: 2199

disabilities were exempted. I believe we should relook this decision.

Previously the CE committee had said it did not intend to use the Act as a means to improve access to and support for children with special needs. But, now, the Government has said that it wants to progressively integrate the disabled into society. This would mean acting to ensure the disabled are not kept out from the mainstream. Hence, unless there is a medical diagnosis that a child cannot be educated, CE should apply to them as it applies to the mainstream. This is not a call for all disabled children to attend national schools. I know Special Education Schools (SPED) offer specially-tailored programmes with specially-trained teachers, special facilities and more time and attention for our special children. But why not include SPED schools in the Act? It was said that exemption from CE gives flexibility to families of children who need special care. Should it not be the Act that should be flexible for the children's benefit? Because the point we all accept as the reason we have CE is that education is vital for our children and we must protect every child's right to an education. Let us keep to this spirit and extend it to the disabled.

MOE need not run SPED schools to make education compulsory for the disabled children. It already works closely with VWOs to support these schools. Since 2000, it has reviewed its funding programmes for these schools and provided more help in teacher training and curriculum upgrading. We have more SPED schools now than in 2000. The older ones are getting new homes and facilities with help from MOE, which is allocating $55 million yearly, starting this year, to 2008, to improve education for the disabled children. Because the groundwork is done, it means the conditions are right and ripe to do away with an exemption. Even if children are put on the waiting list, it would not

Column: 2200

excuse parents from shirking their duties. The committee has said it may be too harsh to enforce CE on families with special children. I agree these families need help to overcome their difficulties, financial or otherwise. Struggling or dysfunctional families with abled children need help too, and they do get help. Are they excluded from CE? It should be no different for the disabled children unless our many-helping-hands approach is inadequate. I urge the Ministry to, at least, consider making education compulsory for the disabled children who qualify for mainstream schools as the exemption covers children with physical disabilities whose IQs can be higher than mainstream children.

If education is compulsory in national schools and one qualifies for these schools, should not special education be compulsory? There are early intervention programmes that could determine if children with disabilities could cope with mainstream education. At least, let us start somewhere.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: Mr Chairman, Sir, I certainly agree with Mr Gan Kim Yong that teachers are the cornerstone and the guarantee that our educational programmes would be implemented well in school. They play key roles in all our educational programmes. In my earlier response to questions on Chinese education, for example, you see how I had emphasised the important roles of the teachers. Yes, it is important to ensure that good people continue to join the Education Service and it is also important to ensure that the working conditions of the teachers who are in the service are well taken care of. We want them to have more time and energy to reflect on what they do, innovate, and try new methods.

I am very pleased to report that over the last few years, we have been able to grow the ranks of our Education Service. We have been able to increase the

Column: 2201

number of teaching staff from 23,000 teachers in 2000 to 27,000 in 2004. It is a 17% increase and, we have achieved this without compromising on quality. In fact, if anything, the quality has gone up. In 2000, only 48% of the teachers recruited were graduates. In 2004, it was 74%. We continue to be rigorous in our selection and training of teachers. In fact, we have introduced a lot of other programmes to ensure that they keep up with the changes in times so that they could continue to teach and guide the students. Non-graduate teachers could take up degree programmes, for example, either full-time or part-time. We also have the Professional Development Leave Scheme (PDL) to allow graduate teachers to pursue post-graduate qualifications. There is also the Teacher Work Attachment (TWA) Programme to allow teachers to spend some time with industry and the private sector to know what is it like outside.

In 2004, for example, 132 teachers were granted study leave to pursue their undergraduate studies. 102 were granted PDL to pursue their post-graduate studies. We have awarded post-graduate scholarships to 39 teachers. The TWA, which was introduced in 2003, also received very good response. So far, we have about 640 teachers who have taken up local and overseas attachments with schools as well as public and private organisations. Some interesting examples include attachments with the National University of Laos and the CitiGroup Overseas offices, as well as local institutions such as SingHealth Group and the Singapore Business Federation. So, we do have a good programme to expose our teachers.

Of course, Mr Gan Kim Yong mentioned about teachers' workload and, I think, Mdm Ho Geok Choo earlier on also mentioned the same point. To reduce the

Column: 2202

teachers' workload we would be doing a few things. First, we would be providing more resources to our schools so that they have the autonomy to decide how best to use them to supplement their manpower needs. For example, they could engage additional temporary or permanent manpower to support the teachers. In 2005, we have set aside an additional $12 million to increase the manpower grant for the schools. The grant to a primary school would be increased from the current $60,000 to $100,000 a year. For the secondary schools, junior colleges and CIs, it would be increased from $100,000 to about $130,000-$140,000.

This is a significant increase in allocation, and the schools will be able to engage two or three more relief teachers above their teacher quota or buy services, like teaching assistants and so on, to handle specific administrative tasks.

5.30 pm

The second thing that we are going to do is to recruit more teachers. The Prime Minister, during last year's National Day Rally, said that over the next five years, the Ministry of Education will be providing about 3,000 more teachers to the schools. This is a 15% net increase from the current teaching force which, as I mentioned earlier, has been expanded by 17% since year 2000. By 2010, there will be a net increase of 1,000 primary school teachers, 1,400 secondary school teachers and 550 JC/CI teachers. This translates to an increase of roughly 10 teachers in every school.

In addition, the Ministry of Education also plans to deploy at least one school counsellor to every secondary school by 2006 and at least one school counsellor to every primary school and JC by 2008. We will also train more teachers as teacher counsellors in schools.

We hope that with this additional manpower in schools, there will be better

Column: 2203

spreading of the load. But we can achieve more than this. With greater capacity in schools, the teachers will have more time to plan and experiment with teaching approaches that will deliver the best education outcomes for their students as well as to respond to their needs.

We have also looked at other sources to recruit teachers. For example, we have introduced a new adjunct teacher scheme since October 2004 to attract former trained teachers, eg, those who have retired or who have left service, to rejoin the teaching profession. We feel that this scheme will not only support our teachers but also provide an avenue for the Ministry of Education to retain the expertise and institutional knowledge of experienced teachers.

Special education was also mentioned. In order to provide more specialised support for students with learning disabilities in our schools, the Ministry of Education will also recruit, over the next five years, about 230 Special Needs Officers. These officers will focus on helping students with problems like dyslexia and autistic spectrum disorder in designated mainstream schools. This should help in further integration of the children.

Over the last few years, we have increased the administrative capabilities of the schools by introducing positions like Administration Managers and Operations Managers. They handle administrative and support functions at the school level. Currently, each school has about nine to 22 administrative posts, depending on their enrolment size.

To coordinate the overall administrative support to schools, I am happy to announce that we will be introducing a new post called Vice Principal (Administration) or VP (Admin) position in schools. The VP (Admin) will be positioned to help the principal manage

Column: 2204

resources strategically to drive excellence in administration as well as innovation at the school level.

As we provide more resources and autonomy to schools, as schools design various niche programmes for their pupils, as schools take active part in planning upgrading, we need to build up the planning capacity and capability of our schools. This will be one of the key challenges for the new VP (Admin). In addition, the VP (Admin) will also oversee all non-curriculum areas ranging from, eg, human resource management to estate management, quite a big job - literally, pau sua, pau hai .

The VP (Admin) positions will be created based on justifiable demand. It is not that every school will automatically get a VP (Admin), because different schools have different needs. Schools with large student enrolment, good programmes and a large network of stakeholders will conceivably need a VP (Admin) more in order to ensure that resources are well-utilised.

The first few VP (Admin) will be assigned based on these general guidelines. VP (Admin) will be selected from our current pool of Executive and Administrative Staff as well as mid-career entrants. They will be appointed probably in June this year. The appointment will be part of the overall grooming process for talented individuals in MOE. To note, the VP (Admin) need not be an Education Officer, because his or her job is basically resource management.

Mr Zainudin Nordin said that the classroom has not changed since 1895. I will invite him to visit some of our schools. It appeared that whatever he saw in the classroom when he was in primary school had stayed in his mind. In fact, the school designs have changed quite a lot, and we have incorporated building specifications to ensure that new

Column: 2205

demands and requirements are built in. In fact, it is because of the need to incorporate these new demands that we initiated this programme called PRIME - Programme for Rebuilding and Improving Existing Schools. This is a $4.5 billion programme that was launched in 1999 to upgrade our schools. For example, Pasir Ris Primary had innovatively created resource corners in classrooms by constructing “L-shape�? classrooms during PRIME. With this layout, it is possible to split a class into small groups to engage in different activities - you may even be able to run a small opera in the classroom. It is not like the old days where everybody sat in the middle, in rows or in circles, listening to the teacher.

I am also pleased to announce that the Ministry of Education will be providing greater administrative flexibility for primary and secondary schools. This is part of our continuing efforts to give more resources to the schools. We are going to do this by freeing up 10-15% of the physical capacity in schools through adjustments to the planned enrolment. Each school will have the autonomy to decide how best to make use of the physical space thus created and freed up for their educational programmes.

In general, the planned enrolment will be reduced at the Primary 1 level in all Government primary schools from 2006, if possible. Government-aided schools will be given an option to adjust their enrolment, as reduction in enrolment will affect their respective communities, just in case they feel obliged to take in more students from their respective communities that they are serving.

Prof. Ivan Png asked why is there a need to build bigger classrooms if the class size has been reduced. I just want to say that the class size was reduced only for Primary 1 and Primary 2. The Primary

Column: 2206

1 class this year was reduced from 40 to 30. The class size from Primary 3 onwards has not been reduced and therefore it is justifiable to build bigger classrooms as part of the PRIME requirement.

Mr Gan Kim Yong, Mr Iswaran, Mdm Ho Geok Choo and Ms Olsen spoke about special education, and some of the speeches were really passionate. First, I want to outline the framework for special education. In general, we have the Special Education (SPED) schools run by the voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), because we believe that VWOs have got much greater passion in serving their respective case clients. What the Government does is to work hand in hand with them and give them support.

SPED schools cater to children with more severe disabilities. Those with mild disabilities and are able to cope and possible to be integrated, we will allow them to attend national schools. This approach acknowledges that different children have different needs, and it is better that we do something that is sensible for each of them. So some will go to SPED schools and some will go to our schools.

Ms Olsen asked why not make it compulsory. There are some children who are really medically unfit to attend school. This number, however, is pretty small. We currently have 10 from the 2003 Primary 1 cohort and 12 from the 2004 Primary 1 cohort who have difficulty attending school because of their condition. If you look at the history of compulsory education, we actually introduced compulsory education pretty carefully. We legislated compulsory education when we had more or less achieved universal enrolment. In the case of special education, we are also not in a hurry. As we improve on the number of children with special needs attending the school, as we achieve near 100% enrolment, then

Column: 2207

perhaps we will consider her proposal. But at the moment, it is more important for us to work towards enrolling as many of them as possible instead of considering legislative changes.

The Ministry of Education currently provides support to 20 special education schools that cater to about 4,500 children with different disabilities. Together with the National Council of Social Services, recurrent funding of up to four times the level of funding per primary student in mainstream schools is provided to SPED schools. Some may argue - why do we not give more? I just want to say that when I first joined the Ministry of Education, it was then only one time. Now, it is four times. So we have made progress.

The Ministry of Education has also increased its support for development costs of SPED school buildings from 90% to 95% of the project cost approved after September 2004.

To further enhance the support for SPED schools, the Prime Minister announced last year that we will be committing a total of $55 million a year till year 2008 for special needs in SPED and mainstream schools. The enhanced funding will really speed up the upgrading and redevelopment of SPED schools, so that more of them will be able to enjoy better facilities.

Other than physical infrastructure, the additional funding will also go towards improving the quality of professional resources in SPED schools, eg, recruitment of better qualified teachers, providing better professional development for the staff as well as improving the curriculum design.

We agree with Mr Iswaran on the benefits of co-locating special and mainstream schools

so that the children can each study in their own school but

Column: 2208

they have the opportunity to meet with each other. It provides good opportunity for students to see and learn from each other and help to instill in them the care and concern for others that we want to promote in a wider society. Therefore, it meets our educational objectives.

5.45 pm

Currently, there are three SPED schools that are located adjacent to mainstream schools. These are the Spastic Children's Association which is next to Meridian JC, Canossian School for the Hearing Impaired - it is sharing the same compound as Canossian Convent - and Pathlight School, the holding school was next to Chong Boon Secondary School and the new building is next to Townsville Primary. So co-location is already taking place. We hope to see more of such relationships between mainstream schools and other special schools. As far as possible, we will also facilitate such co-location for the new purpose-built schools.

For children with mild disabilities that can enter into mainstream schools, we will try to cater for them in our schools. There are currently about 2,500 children with mild disabilities that are studying in mainstream schools. These include children with mild physical disabilities, visual and hearing impairment, autism and dyslexia. The Ministry of Education dedicates resources to provide support and to facilitate their integration in the schools. For example, for children with sensory impairment, resource teachers are provided at six designated secondary schools to help their learning in schools.

There are 59 mainstream schools that have been retrofitted to facilitate access for children with physical disabilities. Children with sensory and physical disabilities are also provided with assistive devices to aid their learning. Children with dyslexia or autism in mainstream schools

Column: 2209

also receive additional support from the Ministry of Education and the voluntary welfare organisations. As I mentioned earlier, we are recruiting additional staff to help them.

Last, but not least, with effect from year 2006, the Ministry of Education will strengthen the support for children with learning disabilities by deploying Special Needs Officers to 20 designated primary schools and 30 secondary schools. Going forward, the Ministry of Education will continue to make improvements on how we support children with special needs.

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, I would like to ask the Minister a question regarding teachers' workload. We welcome the initiatives that the Ministry has introduced. I am sure the teachers would be very happy. But I think it is still important for us to understand the nature of the workload of the teachers. So I would like to urge the Ministry to consider doing a review on the workload and maybe develop some kind of an indicator or index so that we can compare over time whether the workload has increased or decreased and also compare with other countries, so that we have a handle on the workload. Because teachers are not like managers, where they are on flexi hours and can adjust their own time. They are not like workers who have fixed hours, so long as you work 44 hours a week, you are all right. But teachers must have wider scope, and it is important for us to have a feel of their workload, whether it is adequate or appropriate.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: Sir, we will certainly look into this proposal. But I want to mention one thing. Teaching is a calling. It is a vocation. There are teachers who just want to go all the way, whatever review we have done. And they always will have a heavy workload. Sir, the ironical thing is that good teachers always have heavy

Column: 2210

workload. It is just like good MPs always have heavy workload. There was a question to Mr Hawazi on why some parents prefer to go and see the MP, rather than the school. Maybe, it is because the MP is very popular. So we will have to see the workload in context. I agree with Mr Gan that there is a lot of intangible in a teacher's work and therefore no amount of survey can really give us a good feel of what it actually is. But providing additional administrative support by recruiting more teachers while we can, will be the things that we will continue to do.

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: A point of clarification, Sir. Perhaps, I was very worried about the timer, so I did not really make my point clear. But I was just wondering if the Ministry will consider extending compulsory education to children with perhaps physical disabilities through early intervention which will qualify them for mainstream schools, especially since now more resources are given to a number of mainstream schools to cater for children with disabilities, such as facilities and better trimming. I would not say medically unfit, but because of their physical disabilities, they can go to the mainstream schools, and whether compulsory education can be extended to this group of children.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: If you are talking about early intervention, then presumably you are talking about children of pre-school age. Those children are not included in compulsory education because compulsory education only starts at Primary 1. If you are talking about children who are already in national schools, then why legislate? They are already in there.

To me, the most important issue is not whether the legislation includes them but whether we are able to make sure that all of them have the opportunity for appropriate education. There will be

Column: 2211

some, because of special circumstances, whose parents may decide not to enrol them, let them stay at home, educate them at home, and so on. We probably would have to respect that, rather than force the issue through legislation. If it is legislated, and if the parents do not send the kid to school, they have committed an offence. But if, on the other hand, the voluntary welfare organisations are able to get to these children who are at home and offer them help, and maybe the Community Development Councils also join in and assist, that may be the best arrangement for the family. So let us look at the effect of all these combined efforts, rather than looking at the legislation alone.

Mr Iswaran: Sir, the Ministry agrees that it is a good idea to have special schools and mainstream schools co-located, and I was pleased to hear about the three examples. Can I ask whether these three co-location examples occurred by certain liberty or was it because of planning and intent on the part of the Ministry and the parties involved? It is a very important point to address because it seems to me it is more likely to be the case as it happens perchance and because it is Canossian School, maybe the school initiated the idea. If the Ministry sees about it, then in the planning exercise for new schools and also as part of the PRIME programme, there should be a specific targeting and including it in site planning, and so on. Because we all know that there are site norms, you have to negotiate with URA for schools, and if you are going to co-locate schools, you need to make additional provisions. I would appreciate some clarifications on that.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: Sir, I do not know why Mr Iswaran is so sceptical about our intention. I did say in the reply that we consider co-location to be a good move. So if it is possible to co-locate, we will do so. The co-location of all the three

Column: 2212

schools took place because of well-intended direction. If you look at Canossian School, it has got its own programme of catering for the hearing impaired, using technology, carrying hearing aid, and so on, and it has been well-integrated. When I visited the Pathlight School, the neighbouring school Chong Boon, found that the arrangement was actually very good. You will find that the students really go out of their way to help the students from Pathlight School. So definitely, if we can, we will plan for more.

The Chairman: Dr Michael Lim is not here. Mr Gan Kim Yong.

Tertiary Education

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, I have three concerns with regard to the corporatisation of the universities - NUS and NTU. Firstly, to take advantage of the flexibility arising from the corporatisation, the universities must identify areas where it has the potential to develop peaks of excellence and put in place a clear strategy to develop these areas. So I would like to ask the Minister whether he will share with us which particular areas have these universities identified as potential growth areas. Secondly, very often, the success of a good strategy depends on the people behind it. It is therefore crucial for the universities to have the right people who have the vision, the ability and the determination to lead the universities and take them to greater heights. Could the Minister tell us whether he thinks the present leadership at the two universities is appropriate and whether there is a need to strengthen it? Thirdly, the corporatisation will also give the universities flexibility in setting their fees. This may translate into higher costs for the undergraduates, maybe in certain faculties at least. Will the Minister assure the House that corporatisation by itself should not lead to higher fees?

Column: 2213

On a related subject, the Minister announced last year that the Government will gradually reduce its subsidy for university students over time. I would like to urge the Government to recover this move as it is in Singapore's interest to help our children maximise their potential and to pursue their tertiary education here. Given that universities can now go out to raise funds, could the Government consider reducing the subsidy only after the universities are able to raise sufficient funds to fill the gap?

Corporatisation of Universities

Mr Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio): First of all, let me declare my interest. I am a Council Member of the Nanyang Technological University.

Sir, I support this move to make the universities more autonomous by way of corporatisation. And I think that this move will be in the long-term interest of Singapore. To be successful, I have a similar concern, like Mr Gan Kim Yong, and that is the management structure. For this to work successfully, we probably would need to think of two parallel structures in the university. One, the management structure, run almost like a corporate, a CEO management type of skills. And the second, an academic type of structure. These two need to be run in parallel. I ask the Minister whether these have been taken into consideration and, if so, whether we are going to make some changes in the management structure in the universities before we make this move.

Second, I am not so sure whether the problem of corporatisation and the related problems within the universities will arise because the universities are not able to handle this move, but more because of MOE's inability to let go and whether the problem will remain with MOE who wants

Column: 2214

to still exercise control and still expect the universities to move fast enough. This is another issue that needs to be thoroughly studied before we decide to go and corporatise the universities.

The final issue I worry about is how we are going to handle the corporatisation of the three universities. All three of our universities, NUS, NTU and SMU, have different backgrounds. First of all, NUS is long established. It has a very long history and a very strong base of alumni who are able to support the university by way of funding or to become council members who can help manage the university. Therefore, its risks for corporatisation, I believe, are low. Second, SMU. It is a new university. It started on the basis of being quite autonomous and the management structure and how it has developed itself has been almost the model that we want for the rest of the universities. So, again, I think for SMU, the risks are similarly low.

But, on the other hand, NTU has a short history. If you look at the modern NTU, not counting Nanyang University, there are only 20 batches of alumni, or graduates, and I happened to be from the first batch. The earlier batches were only very small numbers - 600 in my batch - and it started to grow. So we have a relatively less established alumni base. Secondly, it is only now that NTU is trying to transform itself from a technological university to a comprehensive university. So I see this as a second major risk for NTU as it tries to make this move. I, therefore, ask the Minister to take this into consideration, particularly when it comes to the allocation of resources, whether it is funding or the type of people to support the changes. And, among all the three universities, NTU faces the greatest risk with this change.

While I think NTU welcomes this - and I, as a Council Member, also welcome this move - I ask the Minister not to treat the three

Column: 2215

universities equally in this case but to give preference to NTU by way of support structures and funding, as NTU faces the greatest risk with this change.

6.00 pm

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan (Hong Kah): Sir, the move to corporatise our local universities, NUS and NTU, is a highly commendable decision. That this decision reportedly took three years to make across the tenure of two Ministers reflects the fact that the issues are highly complex. From a conceptual viewpoint, nobody can argue against the benefits of university autonomy. But, as in so many Government policies, there can be a darker side to this decision, and I urge the Ministry to give due consideration to some practical problems that may arise from the corporatisation.

Firstly, while competition is good, the focus should be beyond, rather than within, our shores. All three universities, NUS, NTU as well as SMU, offer popular courses like business administration, with each of them trying hard to differentiate from the others to attract the best student brains. This competition makes for a more varied landscape, and certainly interesting newspaper and bus-stop advertisements. But our small size makes me wonder if such competition is more confusing and destructive than helpful, and also wasteful of already scarce funds. Might it not be better for these universities to each develop into more specialised schools that offer breadth and depth in both research and teaching? So, it is a managed autonomy that we are talking about, rather than a free-for-all.

Another obvious concern is further future fee hikes. The recent fee hikes by all three universities might well be viewed as a herald of things to come. This is the unavoidable conclusion of a sceptical public. This fear is accentuated by the Government stating very clearly that it

Column: 2216

intends to reduce the 75% subsidy to university students. I urge the Ministry to ensure, as in the case of overseas colleges, that there will be enough scholarships, grants, loans and part-time jobs available on campus to help students pay their fees, so that no deserving student will be deprived of a university education due to financial circumstances. The universities, like their US counterparts, could evaluate how much fees a student can contribute, based on his family circumstances, before looking at a combination of university-funded scholarships, grants, loans and part-time work to help him pay his fees. They should not impose a one-size-fits-all means test, as this could mean that those from the sandwich class could be left out in the cold, in terms of financial assistance. The drop in funding will need to be compensated, as in other privately-run universities elsewhere, by the greater involvement of their alumni in fund-raising.

Finally, the road to autonomy is going to be strewn with sensitive staff issues. As the university reviews its hiring and tenure policy to attract and keep the best talents, inevitably there will be casualties. I hope that the transition will be handled with sensitivity, especially the older staff whose efforts and contributions had made the universities what they are now.

The Chairman: Prof. Low Seow Chay is not here. Mr Low Thia Khiang.

Funding of Tertiary Institutions

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, the preliminary report of the steering committee to review university autonomy, governance and funding released by MOE recently stated that the Government will shift its funding model for university by 2006. Instead of funding operating expenditure based on the number of students enrolled, funding will be based on the number of graduates produced.

Column: 2217

According to the report, the general rationale is to enhance the competitiveness of our three public-funded universities. The change will also encourage universities to meet national manpower targets and the Government will be able to predetermine the number of graduates when it provides its funding.

Under the new system, it would be up to the universities to decide the numbers and profiles of the students it should enrol, so as to produce the required number of graduates three or four years down the road. Universities which do not meet output targets will have to refund MOE the money based on a certain formula. Such a funding model will also force universities to look at alternative sources of funding, such as soliciting donations and enrolling full-fee paying foreign students.

Sir, I do agree that whenever public funds are used, we should have some measure of accountability and some ways of measuring whether the funds meet our national objectives. However, the question is whether it is in the national interest to fund operating expenditures of universities based on graduate numbers. If graduate numbers determine the level of funding received, a university will face pressures to graduate a high percentage of the intake. This could manifest itself in the lowering of academic standards. For example, in order for a university management to do financial planning, it will probably set graduate targets for individual faculties to achieve, to ensure that it can obtain a certain amount of funding from MOE. Academic staff will then face pressures to pass students and face intense scrutiny for failing students. Their bargaining power with the students will be weakened. After all, how many students can a professor fail. Once a student knows that this is a numbers game, they need not try too hard.

Column: 2218

According to the same report, Sir, MOE intends to increase the university cohort participation rate from 21% from each Primary 1 cohort to 25% by 2010. Assuming that the average intelligence of each cohort is constant over the years, what this means is that the cut-off point for entry into university will be lower, since more students in each cohort are to be admitted into university. If the universities are to enrol weaker students and yet are to be funded based on the number who graduate, the threat to maintaining standards becomes clear.

Another concern is that stricter rules will probably be implemented on the maximum candidature of our students. There may even be rules to remove a student after the first year when he fails so that he does not remain in the system for too long. This will inevitably put much pressure on university students. We should bear in mind that someone who manages to get a degree with a longer duration can still contribute much to society, even though the system sees him as not cost-efficient. Will the new funding model force such students out of tertiary education prematurely? I understand that in some European countries, such as Sweden and the Netherlands, funding of tertiary institutions is based on a mix of input and output targets. While they accept that tertiary institutions must be performance-driven, they also recognise that there are dangers in over-reliance on output targets. Hence, these countries fund their education institutions based on a mix of input and output targets, based on both the number of first-year students enrolled and the number of graduates produced. Why is the Ministry not considering a mix of input and output targets?

Sir, using graduate numbers as a primary measure to fund universities is a drastic change which leads us to conclude that all that matters to this Government is

Column: 2219

students getting that piece of paper. Is that the only one value of education?

The Chairman: Mr Chiam See Tong is not here. Prof. Ong Soh Khim.

University Fees

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim: (In Mandarin) : Sir, I must, first of all, declare my interest as I am presently an Associate Professor at NUS. The announcement made by the three universities that they are planning to raise their tuition fees from 5% to 15% may appear to be a simple “inflation�? problem. However, the students and parents have quite varied opinions on this issue. I would like to raise a few points.

(1) Both the universities and MOE believe that by raising tuition fees, they will have more funds to hire high-calibre professors and improve the basic infrastructure of the universities. This would also imply that both teaching and curriculum qualities will be raised. This sounds rather commercial and conveys the meaning of “you pay for what you buy�?. Do higher tuition fees equate to better universities? Are we treating public universities like profit-oriented institutions? Are we commercialising the education process and making university education a privilege of the rich? Universities have the responsibility to train talents and professionals for the country.

(2) One of the reasons for the tuition fee hike is to provide more funds in hiring overseas “gurus�?, ie, renowned scientists and research professors to enhance the quality of teaching. However, are these famous researchers and scientists equally keen on teaching? Outstanding researchers and scientists do not necessarily equate to quality teachers and they may not be able to raise the quality of undergraduate teaching. We need to be cautious as universities should not spend big bucks in hiring renowned overseas

Column: 2220

professors for conducting blue-sky research alone.

(3) Universities mentioned that they would be providing more scholarships, loans, bursaries and financial assistance schemes, as well as increasing “study while you work�? opportunities to ensure that no qualified students will be denied entrance due to financial constraints. Loans are akin to two pockets: take away money from the right pocket and deposit some money into the left pocket. Unfortunately, money taken away is real, and the deposit is a loan. Every student will be debt-ridden upon graduation. Finally who benefits? This is none other than the commercial banks which arrange the loans for the students! Eligibility of bursaries and study loans depends on the combined income of a household. However, the combined income does not represent the true affordability as the older siblings in the family could all be paying back their study loans. As a result, many students could be denied of their financial assistance. Statistics also show that many students apply to use their parents' CPF to pay for the tuition fees. Due to the lowering of the salary ceiling of CPF, the parents' accounts are heavily laden with a myriad of payment items, such as the increased MediShield premium, housing loan and tuition fee loan. It is also doubtful that by providing students with part-time working opportunities, whether it helps the students financially, or weighs them down in their studies.

(4) Presently, overseas students only pay 10% more tuition fees compared to local students, equivalent to $590 per year. This is much lower than the full fees paid by the overseas students in the UK, Australia and other universities overseas. Although overseas students have to fulfill a service agreement to work in Singapore for three years after their graduation, this has become a "non-issue" due to Singapore's rapid economic growth and

Column: 2221

attractive salary since most of the foreign students are more than happy to stay back and work here. Moreover, many overseas students can well afford to pay full fees. I would like to urge the MOE to consider raising the fees paid by the overseas students. This can be done over a period of time so that the subsidy provided by MOE, which is currently $12,830, can be reduced. The savings can be used to help the local students and reduce the amount of fees they need to pay.

(5) Presently, MOE also subsidises the tuition fees of graduate students. Both research and coursework graduate students are subsidised by the MOE. Among the graduate students, especially the coursework Masters' students, most of them have full-time jobs, in other words, they have fixed monthly income compared to full-time undergraduates. These graduate students can surely afford to pay higher tuition fees. I would like to urge the MOE to consider raising the fees paid by the coursework Masters' students, again in stages, for reducing the subsidy provided by MOE. The savings can be utilised in subsidising the fees paid by the local undergraduate students.

(6) Parents and students have some doubts concerning the fee hike by the universities, eg, what is the specific use of the increased fee. After the fee hike, is there any guarantee that the quality of teaching will go up? If the universities wish to convince the public, there must be an increased amount of transparency. The financial figures of the universities have to be made transparent and more open, so that the students and parents can know the specific use of their fees and understand the financial status of the universities, the ways funds are being deployed, and how the MOE subsidy is being utilised, in order to brush aside any doubts they may have. It will also be

Column: 2222

useful for the university to meet with the students and ask for their opinions for any major policy changes which may affect them directly. This will enable better decisions to be made by the universities.

(7) MOE announced in January this year that both NUS and NTU will be corporatised and become non-profit companies. After corporatisation, both universities should have the freedom in deciding their own fee structure. SMU announced in January that their undergraduate tuition fees will be increased by 15% this August. Why is SMU immediately increasing their tuition fees by 15%? The main reason could be that SMU is already a corporatised university. After the corporatisation of NUS and NTU, the most concerned question is whether they are also going to raise their fees by 15%. MOE mentioned that after the corporatisation of these two universities, they would have the liberty to increase their fees yearly, but capped at 10% over the previous year's fees. However, even with this capping at below 10%, for example, the universities can increase the fees at 9% each year, after four to five years, according to geometric progression, the final fee increase is still very significant. I hope that MOE could scale down the percentage of the fee hike allowed, and stipulate this clearly in the Policy and Performance Agreement to be signed with the universities, for avoiding the freedom of fee hike and increase the burden of the undergraduates.

(8) The Government could consider establishing an “Education Bank�?, akin to an industrial bank, dedicated to take care of the financial matters related to education, particularly the educational loans. This could prevent the commercial banks from taking the resources from education, and allow the education funds to be contained within the education system. The Government could also help to diversify the sources of funding for the universities through encouraging dona

Column: 2223

tions from the business sectors, and establishing tax deduction incentives for such donations made.

Mr Chairman, Sir, there are only three universities in Singapore. Unlike in the US, Australia and other countries where there are many public and private universities, our students are left with very few choices. It is very costly to attend universities overseas. The amount of tuition fees we pay is relative to the income of the citizens. We should not allow the fees charged by the universities to reach a stage that few students and parents can afford.

6.15 pm

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: Sir, as Singapore progresses towards being a leading city in the knowledge-based economy, in Asia and in the world, our universities will have to play a larger role, in two regards. First, they will have to provide a high-quality education for Singaporeans and foreign students who attend the universities, but principally for Singaporean students.

Second, they will have to excel in research so as to be able to create knowledge and wealth for Singapore.

In order to achieve this, we need to re-orient the universities and establish a new relationship between the universities and Government, between the universities and their alumni, and within the universities, between faculty and the students of the university itself. A whole new set of external and internal corporate governance relationships needs to be established. We have to re-orient the universities.

In April last year, we initiated the University Autonomy, Governance and Funding (UAGF) review. The preliminary recommendations were released in January this year and discussed extensively by the Ministry of Education's International Academic Advisory Panel -

Column: 2224

which Dr Ng Eng Hen happens to chair. It strongly endorsed the move to transform our universities into autonomous universities to enable them to achieve teaching and research excellence, raise their international standing and enhance their students' educational experience.

I am glad that Mr Inderjit Singh, who is a member of the NTU Council, feels that the move towards autonomy is the right one for the universities and that he is excited by it, even if a little apprehensive.

Indeed, the proposal to change the legal status of NUS and NTU into not-for-profit corporations is to engender a mindset change among the university community at large, to encourage them to take greater ownership of the university, and to shape its future direction, culture and character. This is an excellent opportunity for greater civic participation in the ownership and running of key national institutions - our universities. Corporatisation will signal that the university belongs to its stakeholders - the university management, faculty, staff, students and the alumni - and not to the Government alone.

I fully agree with Mr Gan Kim Yong that a critical success factor for autonomous universities is people, principally the university Council members, key management, faculty and staff. As with the autonomous universities in other countries, the university Councils will have to assume greater responsibility to provide oversight of the strategic direction for the universities, and ensure the proper use and accountability for their resources. Council members should be appointed based on competency and ability to contribute to the mission of the university. Universities will also have to enhance their governance structures and processes involving the Council, university management and faculty, given that decision-making will shift from the Ministry of Education to the autonomous

Column: 2225

universities. Council members in successful autonomous universities abroad invest a considerable amount of time to help the universities achieve excellence. We are fortunate that our university Councils have capable and passionate people, and my interaction with the university Councils tells me that they warmly welcome the move towards greater autonomy and they also recognise their expanded roles and additional responsibilities. The Councils in particular will have to play a more significant role in charting the direction, optimising resources and ensuring the long-term financial sustainability of their institutions to support their pursuit of excellence.

Mr Gan asked if the present leadership of our universities is appropriate and whether there is a need to strengthen them. I am confident that the teams that we have in place - key management and the Council members - are strong teams, in the case of both NUS and NTU. SMU is a private university. It has been autonomous from the outset. But I should add that it is important not to look at the universities through the prism of corporate organisational models. If you look at the top American private and autonomous state universities, their organisational structure is a bit of an enigma. They defy the established tenets of management science. They have loosely coupled structures, highly collegial, sometimes not even clear who is in charge. This looseness and collegiality extends all the way from the top right down to the basic unit of the university, ie, the department within a faculty. The department is not the property or the domain of a senior professor, as it would be in Japan, Germany, Russia, or most European countries. It is, in fact, an alliance of broadly equal members, an alliance of more or less equal colleagues, taking ownership over how the department operates and the goals that it should

Column: 2226

achieve. This very flexibility of the top American universities is what gives them their entrepreneurial spirit and is what has distinguished them from European and most Asian universities.

The lack of rigidity that comes from traditional academic hierarchies leads to constant striving, constant bubbling up of ideas to the surface. And attracting young minds. They do not need to wait 30 years to be recognised because in five years, if they are doing well and have the science, they can be recognised immediately. It is a different structure, different incentives, but, most important, a different culture, a culture of excellence based on merit. This is what NUS and NTU will have to strive towards and evolve towards, changing not just the external relationships with Government, but the internal culture of the university.

Mr Gan also asked about the strategic plans of the universities - how will they become world-class and how will they take advantage of their autonomous status. Such plans take time to formulate. If I were running a university, I would not want to rush it. It requires a thorough review, involving extensive consultations with different segments of the university community. I understand that both NUS and NTU have started a fresh round of strategic review and detailed plans will unfold in due course. But even now, we can see how the universities are starting to differentiate themselves in their pursuit for excellence. NUS, in seeking to develop a community of students with cross-culture exposure, is investing in developing extensive linkages with top overseas universities and establishing more overseas colleges. It is also offering its undergraduates more cross-faculty and specialised modules. It is developing in pioneering ways at the post-graduate level, inter-disciplinary courses and research combining medicine, engineering and the natural sciences. NTU, too, is looking at providing students with global immersion opportunities in China and

Column: 2227

India, raising an entrepreneurial flag and wanting to provide students with a unique residential educational experience.

NUS and NTU are key academic institutions in Singapore. They perform a critical supporting role to our economy, both in producing top quality graduates as well as in contributing to Singapore's vibrant research landscape. They are large, complex institutions offering a broad range of disciplines, and, in the case of NTU, becoming broader as it becomes a comprehensive university. They would need time to change. Change cannot be rushed. So the devolution of autonomy and corporatisation will be a gradual process to ensure that the quality of our universities will continue to be enhanced and the needs of the public and the economy will continue to be met. But our experience with SMU, albeit a much smaller younger university, gives us confidence that the proposed model of governance will work.

Let me address some of the concerns about education outcomes. Dr Amy Khor asked about measures to ensure that. Ultimately, the students are given good teaching. Prof. Ong Soh Khim likewise has said that it would not be wise for the universities to spend big bucks to attract highly renowned overseas professors who only do research. I agree that we need good faculty who would not only do top-notch research but are also keen to teach, interact with and excite students, so that our universities can maintain a high quality of teaching and produce graduates of good calibre. This is, in fact, what we see in reputable overseas universities where senior professors are committed to both teaching and research, with different balance in the case of different professors. If you look at a university like MIT, for instance, in fact, MIT is not renowned to be number one in research. If you look at the number of publications and scientific journals and various other measures, it is not the number one. But it is highly reputed for its teaching. So they

Column: 2228

have got top-rate minds doing top-rate research and top-rate teaching. They are known for that. Just compare MIT with a European university, state-owned, low fees, traditional structures - the difference is there, not just in research but in teaching. And students who pay high fees to get into MIT demand the highest quality.

We should also recognise the very important point that when we attract top faculty, we are not just attracting top faculty, we are starting a virtuous cycle. Top faculty begets top junior faculty, and begets top students. And that becomes a virtuous cycle. It attracts more people who want to work with bright young students, attracts post-doctorates, who in turn provide the base for new top faculty to come in. They feed on themselves, reputation goes up, our students benefit. I am glad that performance in teaching is an essential component of the way both NUS and NTU assess their faculty, which is part of their annual appraisal process. I should also add that the universities' spending on research does not come at the expense of teaching. They receive the bulk of their research funding from A*STAR, the National Medical Research Council, the industry and other external sources, and this is over and above MOE's grants to the universities.

Mr Low Thia Khiang asked a very interesting question - whether funding based on the graduate output formula will compel the universities to pass students at the expense of quality. It is an analytically valid question, but I would not be unduly worried if I were Mr Low. MOE's funding to the universities has catered for attrition that the universities have experienced in past years, so universities will not feel compelled to lower their passing standards for funding reasons. More importantly, I am sure that the universities are fully aware that they have to maintain student quality so as to

Column: 2229

safeguard their institutional reputations. Their alumni, faculty and their stakeholders would hold them to it. He raised the example of Sweden and some other European countries. It is rather different there. In those countries, the universities are obliged by governments to take in massive numbers of students. As long as they pass their High School examinations, it does not matter whether the student is weak or barely able to cope with the university education, he has a right to a place. So what happens in those universities? The first year cohort is enormous and, at the end of the first year, you have what they fondly call the "chain saw massacre" - where examinations are set, students fail, and out they go. If you fund these universities only by an output model, you are not doing them justice for this massive cost they have to incur on teaching large lecture halls full of unshaven students. So you have got to have some components or a formula that factors in inputs as well. It is a peculiar institutional feature and not one that is directly relevant to us.

He also raised an interesting point about cohort participation going up to 25%. Are we sure we are not going to be letting standards go down? I think it is a right question to ask. The answer to that is that standards have been going up in our schools, in our JCs, and in our polytechnics. In fact, standards of cohorts exiting our secondary schools, JCs and polytechnics now, are far higher than they were even eight or 10 years ago. Our students are better-trained, they are sharper on the job, and they are better able to cope with a university education. It is a recognition of that upward drift in quality, that the universities have decided to take in more students.

Let me now address the issue of funding. Let me just say that in the past,

Column: 2230

the Government had paid 75% of the operating cost of undergraduate education and borne in full the infrastructure cost of our universities. Last year, the Minister for Finance, in his Budget speech, signalled that, "Going forward, we need to establish a more equitable and sustainable cost-sharing formula between the state and university students."

The Government has now decided that over the medium term, it will move towards funding 75% of the total cost of undergraduate education, ie, including both operating and depreciation costs.

Let me provide a perspective from the point of view of the Education budget as to why this is very sensible. Currently, the budget for the university sector is about a quarter of MOE's budget. At 1% of GDP, MOE's funding for the university sector is slightly higher than some OECD countries like the US, UK and Australia. It may surprise some, but it is, in fact, a higher ratio. With strong funding support from the Government, our universities' finances have remained healthy, unlike many overseas universities, such as those in the UK, half of which are estimated to be in the red largely because state funding is spread too thinly across a cohort participation rate of 40% in the universities. Even Cambridge has been suffering a deficit in recent years.

Mr Inderjit Singh expressed some concern that NTU faces the greatest risk in the move to make universities more autonomous as it has just gotten used to operating as a fully-fledged university. He asked if MOE will consider this disadvantage when we allocate budgets and resources to NTU. Again, I would not be worried. I would like to reassure Mr Inderjit Singh that the universities will continue to receive substantial Government funding and I am optimistic that NTU will be able to build on its very strong present foundations to chart its

Column: 2231

own path into the future. The funding formula will not disadvantage NTU.

6.30 pm

Costs in the university, however, will go up for a number of reasons. First, enrolment is going up. And so naturally, as we move from 21% to 25% cohort participation, the total cost of university education in the Education budget will go up.

Second, it is a global phenomenon that the cost of higher education increases faster than general inflation. In the US, for example, the average cost of higher education increased by 12% between 2001 and 2004, whereas the Consumer Price Index only increased by 6%.

Third, the universities need a continuous injection of funds to maintain a high quality of teaching and research that Singapore and our students deserve. Manpower costs account for the bulk of universities' costs, and our universities need to be able to pay competitive salaries in order to retain and recruit top faculty from around the world.

MOE will not be able to increase the amount of funding to the university sector indefinitely, without impacting on other education sectors: our polytechnics, ITE and schools. In that context, I should point out that university students already enjoy a much higher dollar subsidy from Government compared to other students. If one were to take the last fiscal year for computation, the subsidy per year which a university undergraduate received was twice that of a polytechnic or ITE student, three times that of a secondary school student and five times that of a primary school student. Moreover, a university student is subsidised for more years of education, compared to students in polytechnics and ITE. After two years in junior college and four years in university,

Column: 2232

would have enjoyed five times more subsidies than an ITE student would have in his two years of post-secondary education.

Take that, plus the fact that the benefits of a university education accrue mainly to the graduate. The graduates from the universities will earn over their lifetime more than polytechnic and ITE graduates, on average, and you realise that it is more reasonable, quite apart from being a more sustainable arrangement, for university students to contribute towards the development cost of universities as well, since they enjoy the use of the universities' facilities during their period of study.

I should also add that 75% funding by the Government is very high, compared to the level of state funding for top universities in the US, UK and Australia. We intend to maintain it at 75%, even after our universities become more autonomous.

The universities, at the same time, are encouraged to diversify their sources of revenue, even as we remain committed to being the major source of funding for the universities. The generous donations received, in the recent past, for the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music, the donation from Ng Bok Eng's family to NTU, the Lee Foundation's donation to SMU, all show that financial support from university stakeholders could go a long way towards the successful launch of some of our universities' major initiatives. Corporatisation and autonomy offer tremendous opportunities for our universities to generate even stronger ownership and support from their alumni and stakeholders, including private benefactors and corporations.

The Government will remain generous in co-funding donations that the universities receive for endowments. In

Column: 2233

fact, it is almost unheard of internationally. When our International Advisory Panel heard about it, they could not believe that we fund one-for-one. In fact, the universities have received more than one-for-one matching for certain large donations. I should add that our donors to the universities, whether individuals or corporations, also enjoy double tax deductions. I think this answers one of Prof. Ong Soh Khim's points. In the latest Budget, PM Lee had announced that double tax deduction will be granted for all donations to Institutions of Public Character (IPCs), whether or not they involve naming opportunities. This, again, would advantage the universities.

Another source of funds is derived through the greater financial autonomy that is given to the universities. Through the one-line block budget the universities will receive for recurrent and development expenditure put together, the universities will have greater flexibility to deploy their resources and make trade-off decisions, for instance, between expenditure on faculty and infrastructure. This will help generate cost consciousness and instil cost discipline. It is then up to each university to decide internally how the funds should be disbursed to the various faculties and programmes to best achieve their objectives.

Next, the matter of fees, and the recent fee increases. I agree with Prof. Ong Soh Khim that we should explore the issue of the fees that should be charged to foreign students. There might be different types of fees for different types of students - whether they come in as scholars or on their own free basis. These are things that could be worked out. But it is a valid issue to be explored. I would add that in setting fees for foreign students, we should take into consideration the larger strategic objectives for the universities and

Column: 2234

Singapore. Foreign students add to the vibrancy of the learning environment in the universities, just like as we discussed this afternoon they add to the vibrancy of our schools. They provide a certain diversity, a different perspective, and they add ultimately to the international standing of our universities when put together with Singapore students.

SMU's increase of 15% is not simply because it is a corporatised university. SMU is repositioning itself. It is adopting a different business model, a seminar-style pedagogy with very low student-to-teacher ratios, and is moving into large new facilities later this year. So the fee increase, in the case of SMU, is due to a fundamentally different type of university that it wants to run, rather than the mere fact of it being corporatised.

Moving forward, NUS and NTU will be given greater autonomy to set their own tuition fees, and to differentiate fees for different courses. But I would mention a few things. First, the Government will remain the major source of funding to the universities. Second, we have put in place systems to encourage and incentivise our universities to diversify and generate additional sources of revenues. Third, under the enhanced accountability framework, MOE will monitor the universities' costs closely and ensure that their costs are well managed. Fourth, there will also be a 10% cap on annual tuition fee increases for NUS and NTU. The 10% cap does not mean 10% per annum. It means anything from "0" to "10". I have no reason to expect that the universities will raise fees by 10% per year.

Finally, our universities are well aware that they need to justify the need for any future fee increases, which would have to be commensurate with improvements in the quality of the education they provide. They also understand the importance of

Column: 2235

communication with students on any fee increase.

I would encourage our universities to adopt the practice at many good US universities to make known to students, at the outset, the schedule of tuition fees they might expect during their course of study. This will help students and their families do their financial planning for the costs of their university education.

Let me speak very briefly about the tuition fee loan scheme. It currently allows students to borrow up to 80% of their tuition fees and start repaying their loans only upon graduation. The loan is funded by the Government, not by the banks. It is all Government money but is administered by the banks. I think it is not so dissimilar in concept to the “Education Bank�? that Prof. Ong Soh Khim described. MOE will increase the loan quantum of the tuition fee loan from 80% to 90% so that students can defer the payment of any increase in tuition fees until after they graduate. MOE is also working with the universities to study how we could further enhance the existing schemes, such as expanding students' work-study schemes at the universities, and setting up of student financing offices to better customise financing packages to individual needs. The specific example Prof. Ong gave of a family that might not qualify under the current means-based rule. These are things that could be looked at by the student financing offices. They could be customised.

I also agree with Prof. Ong that universities should raise the fees for coursework Masters' students since most of them have full-time jobs and fixed monthly income. This is sensible and was, in fact, proposed as part of the University Autonomy, Governance and Funding (UAGF) review. The change should, however, be phased in so that universities have sufficient time to make the necessary adjustments to tuition fees and manpower deployment.

Column: 2236

Let me conclude that our universities have made significant progress. They have reached the stage of development where they are poised to join the league of the best universities in the world. With greater autonomy, our universities will be able to better respond to the needs of their students and stakeholders, better differentiate themselves in the increasingly competitive higher education landscape and achieve the peaks of excellence, by global standards, that the universities and Singapore need. Our universities will be able to build upon the strong support from the Government to continue to maintain and attract good faculty and offer students quality education, with greater flexibility and choice. I am confident that giving autonomy to our universities will strategically position our universities to underpin Singapore's transition to a knowledge-based economy.

The Chairman: We have something like 4 minutes for clarifications. Preference will be given to those who have made cuts. Mr Gan Kim Yong.

Mr Gan Kim Yong: I would like to ask the Minister, with regard to his idea that for the university to grow and be nimble and responsive, it is better to have a much more flexible structure within the university. But I am afraid that the current university structure is fairly rigid, with individual departments, department heads and faculty deans. Does the Minister see a problem in the transition to a more flexible, ownership-based structure in the universities?

The second issue is with regard to the Minister's comment that university education benefits more the individual. I would like to ask the Minister whether he will agree that tertiary education does produce good government, business and community leaders, which benefit not only individuals, but the community as a

Column: 2237

whole. Perhaps we just have to agree or disagree on this point since it is a more philosophical matter.

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: I would say that it will take time for any university to change its culture, precisely because it does not just simply hire a CEO who cuts, hires and changes people. Universities have to evolve. Faculties have to deal with each other with a certain respect and collegiality. There is a plus in some circumstances and minus in other circumstances. But we have to let the culture evolve. They are still young institutions. I do not think they are anything near as rigid as most other Asian universities or European universities. They have a much larger pool of diverse faculty. Singaporeans trained in different universities, and foreigners coming in from various countries. The rigidities are less institutionalised and less deeply-rooted. So I am optimistic.

On his second point, I would not make too much of a point about whether individuals internalise most of the benefits, university graduates internalise most of the benefits, or what are the externalities. The point I would rather make is a simpler one - that university graduates have a much higher lifetime income, on average, than polytechnic and ITE graduates. And looking at the spectrum of students that we produce from our system, and how we should finance them, we should take that into account. University students are already receiving a far higher subsidy per year, and over the entire duration of their studies, compared to other students. So I think it is not just efficient, but equitable, for us to have some rebalancing, particularly at a time when university enrolments and costs go up.

The Chairman: We have time for perhaps one last question. Mr Inderjit Singh.

Column: 2238

Mr Inderjit Singh: Two questions. One is on the ---

The Chairman: One question, please.

Mr Inderjit Singh: Has the Minister given consideration to the structure of the council and the timetable for the implementation of corporatisation?

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: The Government will be announcing its position on the whole set of recommendations of the UAGF review by April. At that point, I think the universities will set out the timetable on how they are going to move from the current status, as institutions with some autonomy, towards a final destination of autonomous institutions accountable to the public and to the Government by way of policy and performance agreements. It will occur in steps and we will not jump immediately from A to B.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: The Minister just now said that the attrition rate of the university will be taken into account in funding. Could he clarify that?

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: The attrition rate in recent years for the universities will be factored into the formula that MOE applies to the universities when it looks at the output funding formula. You assume that the university, if it sticks to its current high standards, would fail students, or some students would drop out because they could not meet standards. So I think his question was analytically the right one, but I would not worry about it because we have factored in some attrition to ensure that the universities hold on to the same standards as before.

The Chairman: Prof. Ong Soh Khim, you have got half a minute.

Column: 2239

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim: A short question instead of a long question. The Minister earlier has said that MOE will cap the fees increase at 10%. Sir, the university can very intelligently increase it at 9% every year and the resulting fees will still be very high. So how can the Ministry prevent this?

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: We will have to be satisfied with their meeting the performance targets. We have to be also satisfied that the cost increases are justifiable. A university cannot simply jack up costs and tell MOE, "Can you please fund me 75%?", and tell students to fund the extra. Because we look at the costs of the universities as a whole. Universities that want to launch major new costly initiatives will have to raise money from outside for such a purpose. We will keep track of this because we are not doing this for ideological reasons. We are doing it for very practical reasons. We must have our eye on the ball. We will be monitoring the situation, particularly in the early years, because autonomy will require several steps and I think financially autonomy is not something we want to leap towards ----

The Chairman: I think we are past the moment of interruption, Minister. Mr Gan Kim Yong, can you withdraw your amendment?

Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the Minister and his colleagues for their very interesting response. With their response, commitment and vision, I am very confident that our future is in good hands. On this note, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

The Chairman: Is the Member given leave to withdraw his amendment?

Column: 2240

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim: No.

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang: No.

The Chairman: I think leave of the majority is given. I heard more "yes" than "no". The amendment is withdrawn.

An hon. Member: Hear wrongly.

Prof. Ivan Png Paak Liang: Division, please.

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim: No.

The sum of $5,089,240,820 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,075,968,100 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: Order.

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

Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2005/2006, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.