GIFTED EDUCATION 

1.           Dr Amy Khor raised a number of questions on the Gifted Education Programme.  Allow me to put the GEP into context.

2.           Since 1984, we have established the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) to cater to the top 1% of our students.  The programme provides an enriched curriculum to nurture these intellectually gifted students.  It develops their skills in critical and creative thinking, as well as problem solving and allows them to work with specialists through mentorship programmes.

3.           Today, our education system is more diversified. It provides different opportunities for all students to discover and develop their talents.  We have schools with different specialisation and niches as well as different programmes to suit different needs.  

4.           But the GEP remains relevant in this broader context of talent development.  The core focus of the programme will remain, that is to meet the educational needs of intellectually gifted students.  Nevertheless, we will build on the strong foundation we have achieved and enhance it further.  

5.           Over the years, we have been moving towards greater decentralization in the shaping of gifted education in schools.   The introduction of the Integrated Programme (IP) in schools that are also GEP centres has allowed these schools to develop their own school-based gifted programmes to stretch their students.  The introduction of Specialized Independent Schools also opens up other new branches in gifted education.  The NUS High School of Mathematics and Science, for example, offers a whole school approach to developing students with exceptional talents in mathematics and science. 

6.           At the primary level, we will continue to have special classes to cater to the top 1% of the cohort in 9 GEP centres.  Because these students are drawn from a large number of schools, it is more practical to gather them in a few primary school to provide them with customised learning programmes.  However, schools will create more opportunities for GEP students to interact with their non-GEP schoolmates, and develop as well-rounded individuals. The interactions should enrich the learning experience for all students involved. 

7.           At secondary level, over 90% of GEP students have joined the Integrated Programme in IP schools.  With most GEP students in IP schools, we have therefore moved from a centrally-run MOE programme for all GEP students to giving these schools the flexibility to shape their own approaches to gifted education.  They will cater to gifted students within the broader context of talent development that the schools have embarked on.   This is in line with the mandate of IP schools to develop our top students by providing broader learning opportunities beyond the O level syllabus.

8.           As for GEP students who did not join the IP, they will be nurtured through other types of school-based programmes for higher ability students in non-IP schools.  

9.           These enhancements to the Gifted Education Programme aim to make the programme more effective and customised for our intellectually gifted students.  Besides the GEP, MOE is also studying ways to identify and develop talents in specialised areas, as well as in non-academic areas, such as sports and arts. There are students with exceptional abilities in one or two areas, but who are not part of the GEP.  By providing diverse opportunities in different areas, we hope that more talents can be groomed and that there is space and opportunities for every talent to be developed to the fullest.  

PRE-SCHOOL

10.          Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked about the quality of the pre-school sector.

11.          Pre-school education lay the foundation for learning in subsequent years.  As pointed out by Mr Yeo, there is a diverse range of pre-school programmes in the market.  This diversity provides parents with a wide range of choices.  However, this does not mean that MOE takes a hands-off approach towards the kindergartens.  In the past few years, MOE has put in place various initiatives at key leverage points to raise the overall quality of pre-school education in Singapore.  

12.          First, we have defined the desired outcomes of pre-school education in 2000 to provide direction for the sector.  These include moral and social outcomes such as knowing what is right and wrong, being able to relate to others and being curious and able to explore.

13.          Second, MOE has formulated and disseminated a kindergarten curriculum framework and teachers’ resource package to guide pre-schools to design a curriculum best suited to young children.  To enable kindergartens to examine their own practices and identify areas for improvement, MOE has designed an instrument called PEAK (Pursuing Excellence at Kindergartens) and disseminated it to all kindergartens in 2003 to encourage them to conduct yearly self-appraisals.  As at Dec 2005, 80% of kindergartens have conducted self-appraisals using PEAK.

14.          Third, MOE also worked on one of the most important factors affecting pre-school education ie quality of teachers.  To upgrade the expertise of pre-school practitioners, we have articulated the professional qualifications that kindergarten principals and teachers must have by Jan 2006 and Jan 2008 respectively.  To help non-profit kindergartens meet these requirements, MOE provides a recurrent grant to incentivise them to upgrade the quality of their staff and education.  

15.          Fourth, we will be working with 10 neighbourhood kindergartens on Project SEAL (for Sustained Early Assistance for Learning), which my Minister mentioned earlier.  Through this project, we hope that children in the kindergartens with learning difficulties can be identified early and given help.

16.          Many of these measures will take time to bear fruit.  With these measures, MOE aims to raise the overall quality of pre-school education in Singapore  over time.  

17.          Mr Yeo also suggested that the Opportunity Fund be extended to pre-schools.  The Opportunity Fund for schools aims to level the opportunities for needy students in terms of enrichment activities.  At the pre-school level, MCYS provides the Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme to subsidise kindergarten fees for needy students. We feel that this is a more targeted approach to help needy children access pre-school education. 

SECOND AND THIRD LANGUAGES / MOTHER TONGUE

18.          Let me thank Mr Chay Wai Chuen, Dr Ong Seh Hong and Mr Ong Ah Heng for their support and interest in the teaching of the mother tongue languages.  I will update members on the changes made to the learning of Chinese language.  My colleague Mr Hawazi will elaborate on the implementation of the recommendations for Malay language and Tamil language later.  

19.          Bilingualism in English and Mother Tongue Languages (MTLs) is an asset for Singaporeans.  Indeed, bilingualism is the cornerstone of our education system.  English is likely to remain the lingua franca of the world for the foreseeable future.  On the other hand, learning one’s mother tongue helps in building cultural identity and knowing one’s roots.  It also opens doors to more economic opportunities.  In fact, a recent report commissioned by the British Council proclaimed that those who are monolingual in English “‘face a bleak economic future’ as multilingual competitors flood into the workforce from all corners of the globe”.  Therefore, we must maintain our linguistic edge of being a multilingual society.

20.          In the last two years, MOE separately conducted reviews on the 3 MTLs i.e. Chinese Language, Malay Language and Tamil Language in their curriculum and pedagogy.  The findings and recommendations from the 3 reviews set the tone and direction for the teaching and learning of the mother tongue languages in the next 5 to 10 years.  

21.          Specifically, the committee on CL has recommended a curriculum to enthuse all CL students and develop in them an abiding interest in Chinese language and culture.  This will be achieved through a more customised and flexible modular curriculum at the primary level.  Furthermore, greater emphasis will be placed on oral fluency and on reading for the majority of students.  Other key recommendations included making CL learning interesting, relevant and engaging, aligning examinations with the revised curriculum, providing more opportunities to use and learn CL in schools and greater community support. 

22.          Since the completion of the CL review, two committees have been set up.  The first is the Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning which I chair.  The Committee is working on five areas, i.e. CL education in pre-schools, reading, writing, engaging the media and educational exchange programmes.  Support from the community has been very forthcoming.  In fact, the Chinese community has come forward to initiate a Chinese Language and Culture Fund to raise the standard of Chinese in Singapore.  It has already raised more than $7m out of its $10m target and the Government has provided a dollar-for-dollar matching to bring its total sum to more than $14m currently. 

23.          With all these initiatives, support and resources, we hope to create a larger environment in which Chinese is a living language for our students.   I am happy to note that more schools and students are showing enthusiasm for learning Chinese.  At present, more than one quarter of our schools have twinning programmes with schools in China.  Schools, from primary up to tertiary level, have organised many immersion programmes to China  for students as well as teachers.   These exchanges will allow our students to pick up the language more naturally and deepen their appreciation of the Chinese culture and society.

24.          The second committee is the Chinese Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Implementation Steering Committee chaired by Mr Wee Heng Tin, former Director-General of Education.  Mr Wee’s committee coordinates and oversees the implementation of the recommendations from the CL review.  Let me provide members an update on the enhancements made to the teaching of Chinese language thus far.

25.          MOE is piloting the modular CL curriculum at Primary 1 and 2 in 25 schools this year. Under this approach, students study a Core Module for 70-80% of the curriculum.  On top of this, they can take a Bridging Module or an Enrichment module depending on their ability and interest. This helps ensure a baseline standard without a ceiling effect (保底不封顶).  The modular curriculum will be implemented across all primary levels by 2010.  Feedback from students, teachers and parents from pilot schools has been positive and encouraging thus far.   

26.          Mr Ong Seh Hong shared that one of his young constituents encountered a teacher who emphasises rote learning.  It is precisely this type of teaching approach which we hope to change.  I encourage this student to feedback to his teachers and school and rectify the situation.  Many of the Chinese Language teachers I spoke to are passionate about teaching the language and in fact come up with very creative ways of helping their students learn.   

27.          Chinese language teachers in many schools are embarking on pedagogical experimentation to make learning engaging for their students. At Ahmad Ibrahim Primary School, CL teachers used a thematic approach on “Chinese Traditional Herbs” to make CL learning come alive.  Other examples included use of comics at Dunman Secondary School, broadcasting programme at Xin Min Secondary and blog diary at Tanjong Katong Girls School.  MOE has organised more than 15 sharing sessions to propagate good practices and we will continue to do so.  

28.          Starting from this year, we will introduce an interim examination format at PSLE and at O-levels.  Handheld CL-to-CL electronic dictionaries will be allowed in the CL composition component of national examinations from 2007 as an alternative to the print dictionary. 

29.          A new Literature in Chinese syllabus is being offered to O-level students starting this year. The new syllabus has included more works of eminent local writers and contemporary literature, which we believe are closer to students' interests. 

30.          In addition, we have set up a 4th Chinese Language Elective Programme Centre in Jurong Junior College and 3 more Zonal Centres of Excellence to promote best practices in CL learning and teaching to other schools.  These additional zonal centres are in Pei Chun Public School, Chung Cheng High School  (Main) and CHIJ St. Nicholas Girls’ School.

31.          Mr Ong Seh Hong asked whether fewer students were taking Chinese Language as a result of the change in university admission criteria in 2004.  In the same year, MOE relaxed the criteria for students to take Higher Chinese at secondary level.  Since the changes, more students have opted to take Higher Chinese at ‘O’ level and ‘A’ level.  At the ‘AO’ level in the JC, the number of students taking the subject has remained roughly the same, but what has changed is that fewer students have opted to retake the CL ‘AO’ examination at JC2.  Previously, JC students have been retaking their CL ‘AO’ examinations to better their scores because it is compulsory to count it for university admission.  Since then, there is a drop in the candidature for the CL ‘AO’ examination at JC2, not the number of students taking CL.  

Conversational Skills and Third Languages

32.          Mr Chay Wai Chuen suggested allowing Singaporean students to learn each other’s language, with a focus on conversational skills.  MOE encourages our schools to offer such lessons to students. We are encouraged to note that 60 schools have already initiated programmes for students to pick up conversational skills in either Malay language or Chinese language.  To facilitate them, MOE provides schools with teaching guides and allow schools to tap on existing resource provisions to conduct these programmes.

33.          Non-native students who are keen and interested to study Malay or Chinese language to a higher level, can also take these subjects as third languages, which will have a greater emphasis on listening and speaking skills.  

34.          However, we need to be realistic--not all students will have the aptitude to cope with a third language.  In fact, it is a very big challenge for most of us to master two languages.  Besides Malay and Chinese language, MOE currently offers French, German and Japanese as third languages.  Mr Chay suggested that Spanish could be offered to our students.  If there is strong student demand for it to be offered as a third language, we are open to this proposal provided our resources permit.

SCHOOL BUILDING

35.          Dr Tan Cheng Bock asked whether it might be more cost effective to refurbish and upgrade school buildings, especially to preserve its sentimental value, rather than just demolish and build new ones elsewhere.  

36.          Where ever possible, MOE does refurbish and upgrade school buildings instead of demolishing and building new ones.  This is for better cost-effectiveness, and to preserve the feeling of loyalty of the students to the school.  This is done where the current site is still suitable, in terms of location, size and population catchment.  

37.          However, in many instances, a school building is vacated due to merger or relocation of schools.  This usually reflects the falling demand for school places in that vicinity, because the estate has matured.  At the same time, new demand is created in new towns as young couples set up home and younger families move in.  Therefore, we will continue to see MOE building new schools in newer estates, like Punggol, in line with population characteristics.  At the same time, we need to look into merging schools in more mature estates like Jurong, so that no school will be left with no student.  Vacated school sites are returned to the Singapore Land Authority to be put to alternative use, or used as holding schools for MOE’s Programme for Rebuilding and IMproving Existing Schools (PRIME).

38.          Dr Tan also commented that some Primary school buildings are too large.  He mentioned Henry Park Primary School, which is a very popular school with parents.  Since PRIME in 1999, almost all our Primary Schools are built with the standard 42 classrooms.  In the case of Henry Park Primary School, it is built to be slightly larger to provide it another 6 classrooms to run the Gifted Education Programme to cater to the additional P4-6 students for the programme.  This explains its larger school campus. 

39.          Dr Tan expressed concern that the larger campus may be too imposing for the young students. We would like to assure him that the P1 students are grouped into smaller class sizes of 30 each and they are buddied with an older primary student who will look after them and bring them around in the first few weeks of school, so that the new students are comfortable with the environment.  As for the ramp in front of Henry Park Primary which Dr Tan mentioned, it is a traffic safety feature that is put in place because of the larger enrolment in Henry Park. It helps to ease traffic congestion entering the school by separating the buses (at the ground level) from the cars (elevated level) and is essential for the safety of the students.

TEACHERS

40.          Dr Tan Cheng Bock also asked for the Ministry's stand on teachers being asked to give their handphone numbers to students and parents.

41.          Respect for teachers is central to education. Our teachers play an important role in nurturing and developing our young. MOE believes in upholding the standing of teachers so that this role is not compromised. 

42.          In the course of their work, teachers may be required to share their personal contact numbers with their colleagues and supervisors, so that they remain contactable.  This is especially necessary during times of emergency. Teachers are encouraged to maintain contact with their students and parents, and many of them do, but they are not compelled to disclose their personal contact numbers to their students or parents if they feel uncomfortable doing so. Teachers will normally, however, provide their students and parents with either their office or staff room numbers. 

43.          Schools value good relationships with parents and will work with them in the interest of their children as far as possible.  MOE does not condone harassment of teachers by parents, and views any such harassment seriously. In addition, anyone found verbally abusing a civil servant could be taken to task in a court of law.

SCHOOL BAGS

44.          Earlier, Mr Ang Mong Seng asked why students are carrying school bags which are too heavy despite schools advocating “Teach Less, Learn More”.  Let me first clarify that this has nothing to do with TLLM but more to do with the kiasu attitude.  With proper planning, students only need to bring whatever they need.  Schools also provide lockers for students to store their belongings.  Having said this, if parents find that their children’s school bags are still too heavy, they are encouraged to go through it with their children so that they bring only what is necessary.  This is also part of good housekeeping.

45.          Thank you.