Darryl David
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just have two supplementary questions. While it is heartening to know that there have been no evidence of external influence in this case, I would like to ask if the Government does indeed keep track of possible cases that fuel the possible coordinated efforts of organisations and agencies that may not be made so public a…”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just two supplementary questions for the Minister. The Minister mentioned earlier about the revamping of CCE. I would like to ask Minister that are there specific strategies or techniques taught to students, either within CCE or in other aspects of school, in terms of self-regulation, how to manage their emot…”
“Three clarifications, please. The first for the Minister. I suggested in my cut, Minister, about the possibility of using AI to create avatar teachers to to minimise or to positively impact the teacher-student ratio. Can the Minister share if MOE is willing to consider this?”
“I ask for leave to withdraw my cut. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $15,473,381,200 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $1,185,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“A dedicated AI CET centre could offer modular programmes ranging from foundational literacy to advanced applications in responsible AI governance, sector-specific problem solving and workplace integration.”
“By situating enrichment within neighbourhood schools, broadening the scope of learning beyond examinations and nurturing pathways for high-potential students, we can combine academic excellence with inclusivity and social cohesion.”
The complete record
Every one of 500 lines we hold for Darryl David, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 10.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just have two supplementary questions. While it is heartening to know that there have been no evidence of external influence in this case, I would like to ask if the Government does indeed keep track of possible cases that fuel the possible coordinated efforts of organisations and agencies that may not be made so public and if so, are such cases on the rise? The second question would be, if these cases show evidence also of the influence of state actors, what actions would our Government typically take?”
“That is the system we must build: one that supports mobility, rewards effort and outcome, and gives every Singaporean the confidence to step forward, even as the ground beneath them continues to shift.”
“By connecting career guidance, training pathways and job opportunities, we can reduce downstream mismatches and give young Singaporeans greater clarity and confidence in navigating their careers at an early age. Mr Speaker, the establishment of SWDA is not merely an administrative merger. It represents a fundamental shift in how we think about work, skills and mobility in Singapore. This is not just about improving training systems. It is about how Singapore competes in an economy where industries reconfigure quickly, job roles evolve constantly and the shelf-life of skills continues to shorten. Our advantage can no longer rest on static qualifications. It must rest on a system that enables continuous adaptation. In this economy where jobs evolve faster than qualifications, our system must evolve faster than jobs. We must give every Singaporean the confidence to move across roles, sectors and stages of life without being constrained by outdated skills or unclear pathways. We must strengthen not only employability, but also the dignity of work where the effort to upskill is recognised and where transitions are supported. As we strengthen this system, Sir, we should recognise that more than a million Singaporeans have already utilised their initial SkillsFuture credits. If lifelong learning is to remain a national strategy, it is timely to consider a further tranche of SkillsFuture credit, carefully calibrated and aligned with an outcome-based approach. This will signal continued commitment while reinforcing the importance of using these public resources meaningfully. Ultimately, the success of SWDA will be measured by whether Singaporeans feel more confident navigating change whether they can learn, adapt and progress with assurance.”
“We have built substantial CET capacity across our IHLs, each offering a wide range of programmes through their respective CET centres. While this improves course access and diversity, we have yet to achieve coherence across the system. Courses from different IHLs could possibly overlap, compete or lack clear differentiation, leading to duplication and inefficiencies. The establishment of SWDA creates an opportunity to address this. SWDA can serve as a national planner, a coordinator, of CET supply and an aggregator of demand signals across sectors. It can coordinate sector-based course mapping to align programmes with industry needs and establish clearer differentiation across institutions. For example, ITE focusing on applied skills, polytechnics on industry practice and autonomous universities on advanced and specialised domains. This allows institutions to complement rather than compete with one another. At the same time, if SWDA is to deliver end-to-end support, we must look upstream. Today, the system engages individuals largely after they enter the workforce or when they are actively seeking employment. But misalignment often begins earlier, when students make decisions about subject combinations, courses of study and career pathways without possibly a clear understanding of what labour market realities are. We should, therefore, treat career guidance as a sort of early intervention policy. SWDA can work through strategic partnerships with IHL career centres and, where appropriate, with even MOE's education and career guidance ecosystem in secondary schools, junior colleges and so on. This is not about expanding SWDA's mandates, but about better aligning existing efforts.”
“Today, as I said before, these certifications are possibly not consistently valued in the same way as qualifications from our IHLs, due to uneven quality, and some employers might not even be prepared to rely on SkillsFuture certifications as indicators of job readiness. By strengthening outcome-based discipline, we improve quality assurance, build employer trust and position SkillsFuture certificates as credible signals of capability, not just proof of course completion. This marks an important shift from participation to labour market signalling. At the same time, we must be clear, Sir, about the purpose of SkillsFuture. It is fundamentally an instrument of economic mobility and employability. Its primary role is to help Singaporeans access better jobs, transition across sectors and progress in their careers. Of course, this will not diminish the importance of personal enrichment. Learning for interest, creativity or well-being remains valuable. However, we should distinguish clearly between hobby-related learning or interest-related and job-linked training. One way forward is a two-tier system. With Tier One focusing on job-linked training, with stronger subsidies tied to clear employment outcomes. Tier Two, perhaps, could support personal enrichment, where individuals may still use their SkillsFuture credits, but with limited or no additional subsidies and with a mandatory co-payment requirement. This preserves the spirit of lifelong learning while sharpening policy focus. It directs public resources toward workforce outcomes without losing the broader benefits of learning for personal growth. Sir, beyond funding, we must address a broader structural issue – coherence across the CET ecosystem.”
“But participation in courses alone is not the objective. The real measure of success is whether training improves a person's working life, whether training improves their life as a whole, whether it leads to employment, enables a career transition or results in wage progression. I would therefore propose a move towards a more explicit outcome-based funding model. Under this approach, funding for training providers is tied to tangible career outcomes, such as job placement, successful transitions and wage growth, with part of the funding possibly deferred until these outcomes are achieved. This anchors the system in real economic value. Providers must demonstrate not only that individuals attend courses but that they benefit meaningfully in the labour market. This shift brings three key benefits. First, it raises the quality of training. Providers will now be incentivised or will be motivated to design programmes aligned with validated market demand and deliver practical, job-relevant skills. Such courses will need to deliver these skills that can be translated into employable outcomes rather than just simply meeting accreditation requirements. Second, it corrects misaligned incentives that have led to unintended outcomes, including the proliferation of low-value courses and those marketed aggressively to various vulnerable groups, as I mentioned earlier. An outcome-based funding model reduces the viability of such offerings and re-focuses the ecosystem on meaningful skills development. Third, and critically, it restores the credibility and employer recognition of SkillsFuture certifications.”
“Employers cannot always distinguish between courses that build real capabilities and those that do not and therefore, do not consistently recognise these certifications with perhaps the same confidence as qualifications from our IHLs. This, again, weakens the link between training and hiring, and diminishes the value of the effort individuals invest in upskilling. The "find jobs, then train" approach takes a different approach to the issue and faces a different constraint. Employers hire to meet immediate needs and prioritise candidates who can perform from the outset. It is what they typically do. But for mid-career workers seeking to switch industries, this creates somewhat of a structural barrier. They must demonstrate skills and experience they have not yet had the opportunity to acquire, making it a bit challenging and sometimes even difficult to access new roles not even when training support is available. Taken together, these approaches are not flawed in intent, but they are incomplete in isolation. One allows training to drift away from validated job demand and the other reflects demand but does not create sufficient entry points for those without prior experience. So, the core issue is a lack of alignment between training, jobs and career progression. And this is precisely why the shift towards an integrated "train-for-jobs" model under SWDA is both timely and necessary. By bringing together career guidance, skills development and job placement into a coherent system, we can better support Singaporeans across every stage of their working lives. Sir, to correct current misalignments in the system, our funding model must shift decisively. Today, funding largely follows enrolment and course completion, that is, a participation-based funding model.”
“Mr Speaker, over the past two decades, we have invested heavily in building a national culture of lifelong learning. The former WDA, established in 2003, responded to structural shifts in our economy with a clear mandate – strengthen employability through a more systematic approach to skills development and CET. It did so through initiatives, such as the WSQ framework, accreditation of training providers and funding for job-relevant courses. In 2016, WDA was restructured into two agencies – SSG, which focuses on skills training, CET and SkillsFuture policy; and WSG, which focuses on job design, career coaching and job matching. This separation was deliberate. Each agency addressed a different part of the employment cycle, with SSG adopting perhaps a "train first, and then find jobs" approach and WSG, a "find jobs, then train" model. However, if we assess how the system operates today, then several issues present themselves. The "train first, then find jobs" approach runs the risk of creating incentives for training providers to prioritise course volume over employment outcomes. Some providers secure accreditation without clear evidence of labour market demand or meaningful links to career progression and then market these courses aggressively, sometimes targeting vulnerable groups, such as the elderly. Sometimes these courses are promoted with limited actual career pathways. As a result, SkillsFuture risked being seen less as a national upskilling effort and more as a commercial opportunity for some providers. The system is now crowded with courses of uneven quality, making it difficult for individuals to identify those that genuinely improve employability. At the same time, the signalling value of SkillsFuture certifications has possibly weakened over time.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just two supplementary questions for the Minister. The Minister mentioned earlier about the revamping of CCE. I would like to ask Minister that are there specific strategies or techniques taught to students, either within CCE or in other aspects of school, in terms of self-regulation, how to manage their emotions, and so on, that might help them with their own behaviour management? The second supplementary question is, the Minister talked about connecting with other agencies. Oftentimes I found that students who are involved in acts of bullying, they themselves perhaps are dealing with issues in their home space with their families. They could perhaps be themselves the victims of being bullied. Does MOE or the schools therefore work with other agencies, be it the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), to find out how they can help the students who commit acts of bullying if they are indeed also victims of bullying themselves?”
“Chairman, OBS was established in 1967 by Dr Goh Keng Swee to cultivate ruggedness, resilience, leadership and character through outdoor experiential learning. It formed part of early nation-building efforts to prepare young Singaporeans for life's uncertainties. From its beginnings on Pulau Ubin, OBS has grown into a key national institution delivering character and leadership programmes for youths. In recent years, OBS has expanded its reach and upgraded its facilities. Under the National Outdoor Adventure Education Masterplan, a new OBS@Coney campus was developed and when fully operational, it is expected to significantly increase OBS' annual capacity, reinforcing the Government's commitment to outdoor education as part of holistic development. Today, the OBS experience is most closely associated with youths for many young people. It is a formative rite of passage that fosters resilience and social cohesion. Sir, given OBS' transformative impact, can we not extend its experiential learning model to Singaporeans who did not have the opportunity in their youth? By building on existing partnerships, could OBS collaborate with grassroots networks, for example, to design adapted programmes for even older adults and community groups? With appropriate adjustments, I believe that OBS' ethos of resilience and teamwork can be translated into accessible inter-generational experiences that foster connections across age, ethnic and social groups. Such partnerships could help bridge generational divides, encouraging lifelong learning and creating shared experiences that deepen community bonds. Exploring these possibilities would broaden OBS' role beyond youth development, strengthening our social fabric and reinforcing a shared Singaporean identity.”
“I ask for leave to withdraw my cut. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $15,473,381,200 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $1,185,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Three clarifications, please. The first for the Minister. I suggested in my cut, Minister, about the possibility of using AI to create avatar teachers to to minimise or to positively impact the teacher-student ratio. Can the Minister share if MOE is willing to consider this? However, even as we create a better teacher-student ratio, I would like to also go to my second clarification, which is to ensure that the direction we have taken towards reducing class sizes continues, not so much for an absolute number, Minister, but perhaps for the appropriate class size to suit the needs of the students that are taking that particular subject. And the third clarification, Sir, is regarding the centre-based advanced learning modules for students in primary schools, I would like to ask Minister if MOE is prepared to consider extending this programme into the secondary school sector, perhaps to cater to some of those students who are a little bit of late bloomers, so that they also have opportunities and options for this programme in secondary school.”
“By situating enrichment within neighbourhood schools, broadening the scope of learning beyond examinations and nurturing pathways for high-potential students, we can combine academic excellence with inclusivity and social cohesion. Sir, this approach aligns with the broader vision of Singapore's education pathways, a system that values personalised learning, nurtures diverse strengths and emphasises inclusion and social cohesion. Broadening Access to Talent Development”
“These after-school modules should not function as accelerated tuition, teaching more of the same content at a faster pace or providing direct advantage for the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). Instead, they should broaden and deepen engagement with subjects in ways the standard curriculum cannot, fostering curiosity, creativity and applied thinking. They should thus provide guided opportunities for students to apply their skills in meaningful contexts. For example, students in advanced English modules could explore literature, journalism or creative writing, extending well beyond what is assessed in schools or national examinations. Mathematics modules might introduce basic financial literacy, logic puzzles, or problem-solving in everyday contexts. Science modules could offer hands-on experimentation, design-thinking challenges, or introductory environmental and sustainability projects suitable for nine- to 12-year-olds. To complement these experiences, enrichment modules could include informal mentorship opportunities with educators, researchers, or even industry professionals who can guide students' exploration in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), the arts, or humanities. While not formalised as a teaching approach, these interactions allow students to gain early insight into real-world applications of knowledge, nurturing responsibility, resilience and ethical awareness alongside intellectual growth. Sir, the aim of this new model should not be to separate students by ability, but to cultivate diverse strengths in every learner.”
“Sir, I propose that after-school enrichment modules be situated in non-branded, non-elite schools rather than concentrated in a few established or prestigious primary schools. Such a design transforms these schools, many of which are located in heartland neighbourhoods, into local "centres of excellence", enabling students to stretch their abilities in environments that are both familiar, yet socially diverse. Beyond academic growth, this approach exposes learners to peers from different socio-economic backgrounds, fostering empathy, resilience and social awareness, qualities as critical to a child's development as intellectual development and growth. At the same time, neighbourhood schools can cultivate distinctive programmes and reputations for nurturing talent, creating a distributed ecosystem of excellence that benefits students, educators and the broader community. Sir, on a practical note, high-ability students may need to attend different modules at different centres on different days, creating potential burdens in travel and scheduling. As such, I hope that thoughtful alignment of module locations and timetabling with students will ensure the programme remains accessible and manageable without placing undue strain on students, parents or caregivers, in terms of travelling from school to the centre. The placement and operation of these centres is not merely administrative. It gives us the opportunity to stretch our brightest learners, broaden their perspectives and reinforce social cohesion, cultivating students who are academically capable and socially grounded. Sir, the true value of the redesigned GEP lies not only in where students learn, but in what they experience.”
“Thank you, Sir, for indulging me again. Sir, at the 2024 National Day Rally, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced that the Gifted Education Programme (GEP), in its current form, would be discontinued and refreshed. This decision marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of Singapore's education system. Since its inception in 1984, the GEP has played a crucial role in nurturing some of our most academically able students. Many alumni have gone on to contribute meaningfully across academia, Public Service and industry. The programme was, in many ways, a product of its time, a deliberate effort to ensure that academic excellence was not left to chance. Yet, over the decades, legitimate questions emerged. The centralised model, which extracted students from their schools into smaller number of designated centres, inevitably reduced social mixing at a formative age. Whether or not elitism was intended, the programme also came to be perceived as accessible only to the affluent, especially with an increasing correlation between socio-economic status and academic results. The new model, in which higher-ability pupils remain in their schools while attending after-school enrichment modules, reflects a broader shift in our educational philosophy, that excellence and inclusivity need not be mutually exclusive concepts. If implemented thoughtfully, this approach has the potential to stretch our brightest learners while strengthening, rather than fragmenting, our social fabric. Unlike the Secondary School-Based Gifted Education (SBGE) model, which is concentrated in "branded" elite schools and mirrors many clustering tendencies of the old GEP, the revamped primary-level programme allows us to reimagine excellence in a more inclusive and socially integrated way.”
“A dedicated AI CET centre could offer modular programmes ranging from foundational literacy to advanced applications in responsible AI governance, sector-specific problem solving and workplace integration. This would complement existing offerings from polytechnics and universities, such as Professional and Adult Continuing Education academies, which already provide professional courses in AI and data analytics. Mr Chairman, artificial intelligence is reshaping the skills, work and society our young people will inherit. The foundation we lay today in schools through deliberate curriculum design, thoughtful pedagogy and inclusive learning will determine whether Singaporeans can navigate this transformation with confidence, creativity and responsibility. I urge MOE, the Government and other stakeholders to continue building a cohesive AI education ecosystem, one that nurtures curiosity, equips students for the future and ensures Singaporeans remain leaders and innovators in an increasingly digital, AI-augmented world. [(proc text) Question proposed.(proc text)]”
“Now, this might sound like something from science fiction, but I believe that it is possible, Sir, to have a version, say, of a teacher Jeffrey in the classroom and then perhaps create AI avatars of teacher Jeffrey that could perhaps go and work in different groups in the classrooms concurrently and then come back again where teacher Jeffrey talks, say, to the rest of the classroom. This would also address the issue of class sizes indirectly in a way. We have talked about class sizes and reducing class sizes for quite some time now over the past five, 10, even 15 years since I came into Parliament. And what we are talking about in class sizes is not so much reducing the class size per se but improving the ratio of the teacher and the student in the education experience. For example, if you have a class size of 20, one teacher is a ratio of 1:20. You can either reduce the class size to 10 or perhaps have two teachers come in. You have the same effect therefore of 1:10 ratio. So, let us explore. Let us explore how we can perhaps use AI in a way that would be able to address the issue of class sizes in a creative manner, such that the end goal is not simply reducing the class size to smaller numbers in a class but enhancing and improving the teacher-student ratio. Sir, I would like to move on now to creating an AI learning ecosystem for CET. Beyond the school classrooms, a robust AI education ecosystem requires infrastructure and support mechanisms to enable learning across life stages. While schools lay the foundation, working professionals must access structured pathways to upskill and remain relevant. The Government could consider establishing a dedicated CET centre focused on AI and data literacy for adult learners.”
“Inclusion also depends on structured support within schools. Educators and learning specialists should be trained to use AI tools in ways to complement individual learning profiles. For example, analytics dashboards to identify early signs of struggle, designing customised practice pathways or integrating AI-assisted feedback to support self-paced learning. The aim is not simply to adopt AI because it is available but to use it thoughtfully to respond to the diversity of learners in our classrooms. By embedding inclusive design principles in AI education, from platform design to classroom practice, we can ensure technology lifts all learners, not just those already advantaged. Inclusive AI education strengthens equity and affirms our commitment to leaving no student behind. Sir, I would like to talk about AI in the classrooms right now to AI classrooms of the future. I think AI can be used, Sir, to really create learning environments in the hardware and the very structure of the classrooms to enhance how the classroom functions, to complement the ability of teachers to deliver in the classrooms. I had mentioned earlier, Sir, that core to our education experience, are our teachers, and may they always remain core, our physical teachers. However, we can explore. How we can explore AI to perhaps enhance what a teacher is doing, create teacher avatars or one educator in the classroom, for example, that that person could be doing multiple things at the same time in different parts of the classroom.”
“Teachers play an indispensable role in developing these capacities, ensuring students grow intellectually, socially and emotionally into confident, capable individuals. Education must remain about shaping thoughtful, adaptable citizens, not merely producing technically competent operators. Sir, a word on teacher capacity and professional development. The success of an AI-ready curriculum depends on teachers. Even the best-designed lessons and assessments fall short if educators lack confidence in using AI tools, integrating them into learning or guiding responsible, ethical use. Strengthening teacher capacity is therefore essential. Teachers in AI-augmented environments must act as facilitators, mentors and guides. They need proficiency not only in AI technologies but also in embedding them – how to embed them responsibly into lessons – designing assessments that measure critical thinking and supporting holistic development. I urge MOE to implement tiered professional development programmes for teachers. Foundational training should cover AI tools and digital pedagogy while advanced modules focus on curriculum design, ethics and mentoring. And continuous professional development should track emerging AI trends to keep educators equipped. And now, Sir, something on inclusive AI education for different learners' profile. As we advance AI literacy, we must support students with neurodiverse profiles, learning differences or disabilities. Tailored programmes and scaffolds are essential to ensure all learners can fully engage with AI learning environments. Adaptive learning systems can personalise content to a student's pace, proficiency and cognitive profile, providing targeted support to address gaps and reinforce strengths.”
“Now, Sir, I understand that countries, such as Finland and South Korea, have implemented nationally structured AI curricula that integrate technical skills with ethics and civic awareness from an early age. Singapore should ensure that its approach is equally progressive, inclusive and systematic. Sir, now on to the teaching, assessment and the core of education in the AI age. With this roadmap in place, the next challenge is how schools teach and assess in an AI-pervasive environment. Education in an AI age should not overload students with content but rethink pedagogy to emphasise reasoning, judgement and creativity. Now, these are competencies that AI cannot replicate. Teachers should position AI as a tool to deepen learning, not as a shortcut. Lessons and projects could encourage students to question outputs, iterate solutions and critically evaluate information. Assessment practices must evolve accordingly. If AI tools are used in assignments, evaluation should thus measure meaningful application of concepts, the reasoning behind solutions and thought processes, rather than merely the final product. Practical approaches could include reflective journals documenting AI use, oral defences to explain reasoning and process documentation, such as prompt logs or iterative drafts. Project-based assessments requiring real-time collaboration and problem-solving can further reveal student understanding and agency. Transparency, accountability and authentic demonstration of skills should guide assessment design rather than prohibit or limit AI use. Equally important, Sir, is cultivating skills AI cannot replicate. Leadership, empathy, ethical judgement, collaboration, public speaking and resilience remain essential to holistic education.”
“It will be the capacity to engage with these tools critically and to harness them to enhance meaningful work. As AI tools become increasingly embedded in everyday life, foundational competencies must be sequenced more deliberately. AI literacy is cumulative. A student's ability to interrogate an AI system at graduation depends on habits of reasoning formed years earlier. At the primary level, this means cultivating cognitive discipline – recognising patterns, following logical sequences, distinguishing correlation from causation and interpreting simple data. These are not merely technical proficiencies. They form the mental scaffolding required to understand how automated systems arrive at decisions. But Sir, as students mature, abstraction and systems thinking can be introduced deliberately at the secondary level. Learners can examine how algorithms are designed, how datasets shape outputs and how human choices influence technological outcomes. And by pre-university, students should be capable of critical interrogation – evaluating AI-generated content, identifying limitations and weighing ethical trade-offs. This sequence reflects not only curricular design but developmental readiness. So, what we are talking about here is the scaffolding of AI learning, a scaffolding of AI education throughout the entire learning journey in schools. Equally important is differentiation. Students with strong aptitude should have access to structured enrichment pathways – advanced computing modules with AI components, collaboration with AI Singapore on student projects, supervised industry mentorships and national AI challenge competitions.”
“Chairman, Sir, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Sir, we are living through a structural shift in how knowledge, skills and work intersect. Artificial intelligence (AI) is not merely another technological trend. It is reshaping industries, transforming organisational modes and models and redefining the skills needed to create value. In Singapore, the transformation is evident across sectors. Firms are accelerating AI adoption and workers are seeking opportunities to reskill and adapt. Yet, recent industry discussions reported in The Straits Times highlight that many small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are struggling with AI implementation, particularly in workforce training and identifying clear pathways forward. This underscores a critical point, that technological progress, if unsupported by structured education and training strategies, risks widening capability gaps rather than closing them. The policy imperative is clear. To build a workforce capable of harnessing AI, AI literacy must be embedded across the entire learning life cycle, from the early years of schooling to continuing education and training (CET) for working adults. Sir, in this AI-driven era, we must be deliberate about what constitutes foundation and what roles schools play in building it. AI literacy does not begin with sophisticated tools or computer programmes or complex algorithms. It begins much earlier, with students developing the ability to understand how systems work, recognise the limitations of automated output and exercise independent judgement. In a world where generative AI can produce essays, code and analysis within seconds, the differentiator will not be access to technology.”
“In conclusion, Sir, I like to say that providing every primary student with a PLD is not an end, but a step to prepare Singaporeans for a future in which AI is increasingly integrated into workplaces and daily life. As Singapore's EdTech Masterplan 2030 reflects, strengthening students' digital literacy and technological skills is a national priority to, "prepare students for a technology transformed world". So, access to appropriate hardware ensures that all students – all students – regardless of background, can engage effectively with emerging digital tools. This aligns with Budget 2026, which highlights harnessing AI as a strategic advantage to build a resilient and skilled workforce. True resilience begins in our classrooms, long before students enter the workforce. Equipping them therefore with the tools – the hardware tools – and competencies to navigate technology confidently nurtures a generation capable of leveraging AI responsibly and creatively, rather than simply using it passively. In this way, equitable access to PLDs in primary schools is not merely an educational measure, but a strategic investment in Singapore's long-term human capital and technological competitiveness. On this note, I would like to renew my call to the Government to make that decision to extend PLDs to primary school students. By taking this step, we are not only strengthening the foundation for AI literacy but also preparing our youth for an AI-driven future. Thank you, Sir. I support the Budget.”
“Early exposure to personal devices also allows schools to guide students in responsible use, cyber wellness and structured engagement with digital platforms. Habits formed in primary school are enduring and introducing these practices early can set the stage for lifelong literacy. The ownership of a PLD encourages students to take greater responsibility for their own learning. It fosters curiosity, self-directed exploration and the confidence to engage with online educational resources. With AI increasingly embedded in learning platforms, these early habits will prepare students to adapt and thrive as technology becomes a key part of their education. Aligning this initiative with the objectives of Budget 2026, providing standardised PLDs to primary students is not merely an educational reform. It is a strategic investment in Singapore's future human capital. It strengthens the foundation for a digitally fluent, AI-ready workforce that will support our nation's long-term competitiveness. The framework for secondary school PLDs, including procurement and financial assistance mechanisms, provides a blueprint for extending this policy to primary students. A phased rollout, like the approach used for secondary schools, would allow careful implementation and adjustment, ensuring that all primary school students can benefit from this opportunity. In short, Mr Speaker, MOE has done it before. They had done it very well – the secondary school students. I see no reason why we cannot extend this scheme further upstream to our primary school learners. It can only bring about benefits.”
“Introduced progressively from 2020 and fully implemented by the end of 2021, these devices were integrated with the national e-learning platform, the Student Learning Space and was supported by financial assistance schemes to ensure that no student – no secondary school student – was left behind. Sir, in previous speeches, including the one I made during the Budget debate in 2024, I advocated extending PLDs to primary school students on the basis that early access cultivates digital fluency and supports equitable learning opportunities. Today, as Singapore increasingly positions itself as an AI-ready nation, this principle remains essential. I wish to repeat my call to explore providing similar opportunities for our younger learners. Extending PLDs to primary school students would equip them with the tools to access digital content, develop computational skills and build confidence in navigating technology from an early age. Such access would lay the groundwork for future AI literacy, ensuring that all students – all students – regardless of background, can engage fully with digital and AI-enabled learning. I am unsure of the progress MOE has made in introducing PLDs at the primary school level since my last advocacy and would, therefore, like to request for an update on any developments on how we can best equip our younger learners for the demands of a digital and AI-driven future. In the meantime, Sir, let me reiterate again how providing PLDs to primary school students would bring multiple benefits. By ensuring that every child has access to a common device, we prevent unequal access to technology and strengthen social mobility. No student would be disadvantaged by relying on shared or outdated devices, reinforcing meritocracy in a digital age.”
“The same AWS research also showed that 91% of Generation Z in Singapore want to acquire AI skills, underscoring both the urgency and willingness of our youths to embrace this transformation. Sir, Budget 2026 rightly emphasises harnessing AI as a strategic advantage to build a resilient and skilled workforce. Such efforts must begin early in schools where habits are formed and competencies are developed and I will speak more on education and AI during the Committee of Supply debate. Today, I would like to focus on a more foundational, more fundamental enabler with regard to the whole issue of AI – ensuring that every student has equitable access to the digital hardware and competencies required before they can even begin to start understanding AI and how to meaningfully leverage it. Sir, before we can talk about mastering AI software and advanced tools, we must ensure that every student starts from the same baseline. AI readiness depends on digital readiness. Without reliable access to personal computing devices, for example, students cannot build foundational skills or experiment with digital tools in ways that will allow them to engage meaningfully with AI later. Sir, digital inequality today will translate into opportunity gaps tomorrow. Students who lack access to devices risk falling behind in learning, developing fewer self-directed learning habits and having reduced confidence in tackling technology-based tasks. But conversely, equitable access to devices provides every student with the ability to explore, learn and innovate. Singapore has already taken a decisive step by providing Personal Learning Devices (PLDs) to all secondary students.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, at the risk of stating the obvious, AI is reshaping the world at a mind-blowing pace. Our young people will graduate into a workforce where AI is embedded across industries and everyday tasks – from the workplaces they will enter, to the problems they will solve, the challenges they will face and the opportunities that they will seize. For them, AI will not be optional; it will be the new normal. The World Economic Forum estimates that by 2030, AI and related technologies could displace 92 million jobs, while creating 170 million new roles, reflecting a profound structural shift in how work is done. This will certainly have an impact on the older workers too. This context, AI is not merely a technological shift; it will define the economic and social landscape of the future. However, as the Prime Minister said in his Budget speech, and I quote: "AI is a powerful tool; but it is still a tool." Tools do not determine outcomes – people do. The question before us is not whether AI will transform our economy, but whether Singaporeans are equipped to harness it confidently, responsibly and effectively. Research commissioned by Amazon Web Services (AWS) on AI adoption and skills in Singapore found that nearly 94% of employers expect their employees to be AI-driven by 2028, yet, 74% report difficulty finding the AI talent they need, highlighting a clear skills gap between demand and supply. So, used well, AI can amplify human capability and creativity; used uncritically, it can weaken judgement and erode independent thinking. Our responsibility is to ensure that Singaporeans, especially our youths, are equipped not only to access AI, but to understand it, question it and use it responsibly.”
“We must ensure that our education continues to produce talent that are well sought after because the relevancy of their skills and how they value-add to the work they do. Mr Speaker, many years ago I made a speech on the PSLE, where I referred to it as the mother of all exams. I think the Prime Minister was then the Education Minister and he found my comment quite amusing. But I am very heartened by what the Prime Minister has said in his speech yesterday, that focus on aspects of education in Singapore, especially the need to reduce the stakes of single examination. So, while I may not stick to my view, that it is the mother of all exams, Prime Minister, I certainly hope that his comments will be heeded and we review, we review how the PSLE stress, that is brought about by the PSLE, can, perhaps, be better-managed or be better-received by the various stakeholders. I also wholeheartedly agree with the Prime Minister that, increasingly, in a world of today, what you can do is more important than what paper you have. MOE is the chief architect, Mr Speaker, that shapes our people and our workforce. In this upcoming term of Government, as Chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Education, I look forward to working closely with our MOE leaders, our educators, our industry, our parents and other stakeholders, to ensure that we nurture not only resilient and skilled individuals, but also Singaporeans with the compassion, empathy and imagination to take Singapore to the next level and beyond. Mr Speaker, Sir, I end my speech in firm support of the Motion. [Applause.]”
“The challenge now is to ensure that these pathways remain relevant and responsive to the needs of a changing world. While we look at designing better and more holistic education systems for our young, we must not forget about our adult learners and our workforce. In an economy that is becoming more dynamic and evolutionary, it is increasingly essential for us to create a T-shaped workforce that have deep expertise in functional areas, which is the vertical; yet broad enough in perspectives and skills, the horizontal; to collaborate across disciplines. The combination of depth and breadth will make our workforce adaptable, employable and ready to thrive in a world that values both specialisation and versatility. The key here, Mr Speaker, is employability. This is why MOE must continue closely with MOM, SkillsFuture Singapore and even industry partners to ensure that continuing employment training are aligned with macro market needs. Only by doing so, we will ensure that our learners, whether they are students, who are just leaving school, or adults seeking mid-career transition can remain relevant in their skills and also add value in the future economy. Mr Speaker, it has often been said that Singapore's only natural resource is our people. Indeed, that has always been true. And today, it is truer than ever. For decades, our progress has been built on the capability, skills, the resilience of Singaporeans. This has enabled us to grow from a vulnerable young nation to a successful and respected one, But success brings about its own challenges. The higher we climb, the more difficult it is for us to keep innovating, evolving and climbing to the next stage. Yet we must. We must, because the world around us is shifting rapidly.”
“It allows students to work on challenges, such as stress, anxiety, anger or social conflicts, before they escalate into bullying and/or emotional outbursts. We just had a whole session on bullying earlier this week, so my proposal could very well pick up on the anger and the issues that potential students, who might end up bullying others, are struggling with ahead of time. Second, it integrates holistic pastoral care into the everyday educational experience in school, reinforcing the idea that emotional and mental wellness are as important as academic achievement. Thirdly, beyond the students themselves, such a system would create meaningful careers for counsellors, therapists, psychologists and other allied healthcare professionals, thus strengthening Singapore's ecosystem of support by facilitating access to these professionals within the community. This proposal is not as radical as it sounds, considering that some companies have in place employee support schemes for employees in high-pressure roles to undergo regular counselling. So, why should this not be something we can consider extending to a young adult whose formative years are equally crucial? By embedding holistic wellness into education, we are preparing our students not only to succeed academically, but to develop the resilience, empathy and self-awareness they will need to thrive in life. And my final topic is more pathways for students and adult learners, Mr Speaker. MOE has made commendable progress in expanding post-primary and post-secondary pathways through initiatives, such as the DSA and the Direct Polytechnic Admission. These schemes have opened doors for students with diverse strengths, offering them alternate routes into the next stage of their education.”
“We must, thus, equip them with the emotional and mental resilience to thrive, and this is the third topic in my speech. A step forward in this area is to, perhaps, consider providing students who are in secondary schools and above with holistic support through mandatory counselling and mental wellness services. Why secondary school students and above? Well, because it is typically in the teenage years that many issues and challenges, both mental and emotional, present themselves, and this is where students and parents could use the most help and support. I have a 17-year-old son and a 14-year-old daughter, and I am sure anyone who has teenage children or has been through the experience of teenage children, will probably sympathise with me here. It is not enough to just increase the demand on the number of allied educators or make support available on demand. I would like to advocate for a scheme – it is pretty radical, but hear me out – where every student is required to engage with their counsellor, psychologist, therapist or other allied healthcare professional for a minimum number of hours each month, with additional sessions available for those who need more support. This is akin to how it is mandatory for students to go for regular school-based dental and medical healthcare screenings. After all, let us think about it for a minute. If we believe in physical health screenings to avert more serious medical problems downstream, then why not apply the same principle to mental and emotional health screenings to avert serious problems downstream? I believe there are multiple benefits to this proposal. Firstly, it normalises help-seeking behaviour and reduces the stigma around mental health.”
“Equity recognises that not all minds work in the same way, and that some students need differentiated approaches to fully engage and thrive. A child who functions differently may need to stand and pace at the back of the classroom to think clearly. Another may need to fidget or twirl an object to focus. Providing these allowances would not necessarily compromise the integrity of a classroom. On the contrary, these allowances might be the key to create a participative, inclusive learning environment where every child, every child can immerse himself or herself fully in learning. Equality gives every student a place in the classroom. Equity gives every student the support they need to flourish within that classroom. I believe our goal is to design an education system that is built on the principles of inclusion, not exclusion; and integration, not segregation. So, creating an inclusive classroom requires a mental shift in how we view what participative learning is and how teachers can conduct their lessons. We, thus, need to find a middle ground by combining equality and equity so that we create classrooms that are not only fair, but also nurturing, where every student, every student, regardless of their learning profile, can develop their strengths, contribute meaningfully and reach their full potential. I believe this is how our education system can be relevant to all learners and value-add meaningfully to the learning outcomes of different learners. Mr Speaker, in today's world, students face a myriad of pressures that are more complex and pervasive than ever before. Academic competition, performance anxiety, comparison culture on social media, personal challenges and so on.”
“When done right, AI is a legitimate tool and a very effective tool to augment teaching and learning, so we need to figure out how to guide its use so our teachers can benefit from it in a responsible manner. We want AI to amplify learning, not diminish or detract from it. One of my biggest concerns in the use of AI in education is how we can ensure that it does not erode critical thinking and original thought. On the worst-case scenario, having our students cross into plagiarism or ripping off someone else's work unknowingly, because they do not know how to use AI responsibly. I believe our assessment models need to be redesigned to balance between responsible use of AI and genuine value-add in learning. For instance, assessment can be designed to differentiate between AI-assisted work versus original thought. Students can use AI for research, data gathering, idea generation with interpretation analysis being in the students' own words. By redesigning our assessment methods, we can keep education relevant in the AI-age by ensuring that our students reap genuine benefit and not just replicate what machines do. On to equality and equity in neurodiverse education. When we first design our education system, we started with ensuring that every child has equal access to opportunities, follows the same school rules and has the same classroom experience. These principles have helped us create common teaching experiences and learning experiences for all students, regardless of their aptitude and disposition. But as we observe, as we understand our students, especially those who are neurodiverse, then fitting everyone in the same education mould is probably not the best approach.”
“If digital literacy is foundational for the future, then should we not extend this commitment to our primary school students as well? I have spoken on this before in Parliament and I believe that a common tablet-like device preloaded with essential software and learning content that are centrally managed by MOE's Edtech division can be rolled out across primary schools, or we can as a pilot programme, for example. This initiative is aligned with both our Smart Nation push as well as our National Digital Literacy programme. I would imagine that such a platform could provide every child, every child, regardless of background, with a one stop e-learning gateway. If done at scale, the cost per device would fall significantly and standardisation would ensure that every student, teacher and even parent is working within a consistent, secure and effective digital ecosystem. Singapore is not alone in pursuing such solutions. In 2024, South Korea announced a similar initiative to launch a multi-billion dollar programme to distribute tablets and AI digital textbooks nationwide to students. Here, I hope that MOE could work closely with the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) and even private sector partners to realise this vision. I said MOE and MDDI, so I am looking at my Ang Mo Kio GRC sister, Minister of State Jasmine Lau, and we should have more conversations over coffee about this. Mr Speaker, we cannot talk about EdTech without addressing the use of AI in education. AI is already here. It is evolving even as I am speaking right now, and it is shaping how our students learn and how our teachers teach. We cannot ignore the use of AI.”
“They are relevance and value-add. Simply put, you will be replaced and sidelined if you are irrelevant and do not add value in whatever you do. This is true not only for individuals or professionals, but also for nations, as President Tharman reminded us in his Opening address. Singapore today stands at a pivotal moment of uncertainty and turbulence. For Singapore to survive and thrive, we must ask ourselves, are we relevant to the rest of the world? How can we as a nation add value to the broader conversations that are happening elsewhere? I spent almost 25 years in the education industry and at present, I am the chief executive officer at an international school, so I firmly believe that education, too, must always be seen through this dual lens of relevance and value-adding. Everything we do for our students, our workers, our people must equip them with the relevant skills so they can plug into the regional and global economy, and education must value-add to their personal and professional growth journey to the day they become better professionals, better individuals, better citizens of Singapore. We want to prepare Singaporeans, not just for today, but for tomorrow and, in this regard, I will touch on four areas in my speech: education technology (EdTech) and AI in education; enhancing neurodiverse education; holistic education, incorporating emotional and mental wellness; and more pathways for students and adult learners. An area where relevance and value-add intersect is Edtech. In 2020, MOE has committed to provide every secondary school student a personal learning device (PLD) under the National Digital Literacy programme to nurture future-ready digital learners. But why stop here?”
“Mr Speaker, the 15th term of Parliament opens at a pivotal moment in our history. In his Opening address, the President reminded us that the world is entering an era of profound uncertainty, marked by shifting power balances, rapid technological disruptions and new threats to stability. Unlike other countries, Singapore's survival is based neither on natural resources nor a hinterland, as we have neither. Rather, our greatest resource has always been, and will always remain, our people. Our forefathers have laid the foundations to transform a largely unskilled workforce into one of the most competitive in the world. In the 1960s, less than six in 10 adults were literate; today, our literacy rate is approximately 98%. As of 2024, almost 65% of our population above age 25 have completed post-secondary education, with approximately 36% of our population above the age 25 holding a university degree, making us amongst countries that have high tertiary attainment. Our students are frequently ranked among the very best internationally in mathematics, science and problem-solving; and our universities are ranked among the best in the world. Mr Speaker, I list these achievements, not to boast or to be proud, but to make the point that these achievements are neither accidental nor due to a stroke of luck. They are the fruit of deliberate investment in our people. And as we celebrate 60 years of independence, let us remind ourselves that what we do in this term of Government will lay the foundation for the next 40 years, in the lead up to SG100. Education must continue to be one of the most powerful instruments to unlock talent, nurture resilience and inspire Singaporeans into our next chapter. Mr Speaker, two values or concepts have always anchored me in life.”
“Thank you, Sir. I have one supplementary question. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his replies. The context of this Parliamentary Question is because on a walkabout visit to the Teck Ghee area in Ang Mo Kio, I had feedback from residents who told me that they felt a particular crossing near the market was not long enough for them. And I went to observe it and it turned out that indeed, after tapping the card, there were a couple of seniors who did still have problems making it across to the other side in time. My supplementary question to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary is, does the Land Transport Authority (LTA) perhaps consult relevant agencies or authorities with their experience in gerontology to ascertain for residents of a certain age what the appropriate time, the adequate time would be for them to cross a certain distance when the Green Man is on?”
“Thank you, Chair. I just have two clarifications for Minister Edwin. I spent six years as an educator at Temasek Polytechnic's School of Design and during that time I developed not just a deep understanding of the significance of design, but also an understanding of the role that design played in the history of Singapore. So, when I heard about the Minister's speech that we are going to have a dedicated design museum in Singapore, it was certainly heartening news. My clarifications are, Sir: are there any particular designers or design disciplines that this design museum will focus on, for example, interior architecture, interior design, product design, fashion design, for example? And also the second clarification is, how will the curation of the material in this design museum differ from other design-related exhibitions that are currently on display in other museums, for example, I believe that the Asian Civilisation Museum has a fashion display. 5.45 pm”
“This is certainly heartening statistics, but I believe we can always do better to help encourage our seniors. I would like to ask if MCCY can share about engagement plans to reach out to more seniors in the community to encourage more participation in sports and other related activities? Disability Sports Master Plan Update”
“Madam, my cut continues the theme that was just mentioned by MCCY's GPC Chairman earlier. Exercise and proper nutrition are essential for not just anyone, but especially seniors in Singapore – for health, independence and quality of life. Current research shows that regular physical activity strengthens muscles, enhances flexibility and improves balance, reducing the risk of falls and injuries. Exercise boosts mood lessening anxiety and depression, and improves cognitive function for overall mental health. We need to promote health and active participation exercises among seniors, in a safe environment, while catering to their evolving needs. Initiatives, like the National Seniors' Health Programme, offer exercise videos and health campaigns tailored for seniors, promote active living and healthy eating. Developing senior-friendly exercise spaces and providing equipment can also make exercise more accessible. Providing information on the benefits of exercise and nutrition, along with personalised health plans developed in consultation with healthcare professionals, empowers our seniors to be stewards of their own health. The Healthier SG initiative offers such support, focusing on physical fitness, nutrition and mental well-being. At the same time, encouraging participation in group activities can enhance motivation and provide social support, making exercise and healthy eating more enjoyable and sustainable. The Singapore National Population Health Survey 2022 indicates that approximately 70% of seniors aged 60 to 74 engage in consistent physical activity, meeting the recommended 150 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity exercise weekly.”
“Mdm Chair, in the early years of nation-building, economic development and housing were Singapore’s main priorities. To provide for housing and industrial needs, many historical buildings were torn down. But the Government ultimately recognised that our buildings are a critical part of our heritage and the need to preserve for future generations. Heritage building preservation led by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) through its conservation programmes focuses on maintaining the original character, and historical and architectural significance of these buildings while allowing for modern functionality. Singapore encourages repurposing old buildings for new purposes, like retail spaces, restaurants and cultural centres, while preserving the features of the buildings. Some of these buildings are not just iconic but a part of the Singapore story, significant for our collective cultural memory. Some notable examples of repurposed heritage buildings are CHIJMES, formerly the Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus School downtown, which is repurposed into a mixed-use development with restaurants, shops and event spaces. The Old Police Academy along Thomson Road is now a contemporary art centre. The Singapore Art Museum has moved to Tanjong Pagar Distripark and is doing well in attracting new audiences in this space. Golden Mile Complex, an example of Brutalist architecture, slated for redevelopment into The Golden Mile, a conservation development including offices, medical suites and lifestyle spaces. These preservation initiatives maintain Singapore’s rich national culture while supporting urban development. I would like to ask if MCCY can provide an update on development plans for heritage buildings in Singapore? Our Cultural Heritage”
“Mdm Chair, Singapore supports artists and traditional arts through grants, arts spaces and programmes that develop the arts workforce. The National Arts Council (NAC) provides grants to artists and arts organisations. For instance, the stART Fund that supports traditional Chinese arts and emerging Chinese visual artists and calligraphists. Some of these schemes are also customised for the artists’ needs. The NAC's Framework for Arts Spaces includes the Incubation Scheme, the Scheme for Developing Artists and Arts Groups, and the Arts Centre Scheme. There are also campaigns like The Esplanade's Arts for Change campaign, which aims to make arts more accessible to all Singaporeans. While the Government has invested in the arts scene, there might be a perception that the arts are not as valued as other industries. There are limited performance spaces, difficulties in making a decent living from the arts alone and perhaps a greater need for audience engagement and appreciation for artistic talent. Can MCCY share the plans to strengthen and support artists to develop their talent and skill to realise their full potential?”
“Mdm Chair, the theme of SG60 is "Building Our Singapore Together" is based on and builds on the Forward Singapore exercise, in which Singaporeans avowed commitment to a renewed social compact based on racial and religious harmony. There are also a mix of legislation, policies, unique commemorative events and education in school and for the public, through campaigns to strengthen racial and religious harmony. Additionally, there are efforts to enable discussion through platforms such as Community Engagement and Dialogue to raise and address concerns involving race and religion with the outcome of fostering respect and inclusion. The National Education lessons and current issues discussions are also aimed at nurturing in our young the notion that this social compact is significant and can only be preserved through deep commitment and belief in racial and religious harmony and inclusivity at all levels of society. Many public campaigns also aim at fostering respect and instilling understanding of the importance of being open, respectful and culturally aware. Mdm Chair, as we celebrate SG60, Singapore, like the world, is changing and we must adapt, while still holding on dearly to what binds us. Building social harmony entails continuous support. The initiatives are valuable ways of cementing religious and racial understanding because this ensures social stability, unity, mutual respect and peace in Singapore's diverse, multicultural society. I would like to ask what are the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's (MCCY's) strategies to unite citizens under a strong sense of national identity, as we forge our future together? Culture Pass”
“Funding for SPED schools to create better facilities, resources and teaching staff to support SEN students is a plus, so schools can hire specialised staff and invest in assistive and supportive technologies. There is also mainstreaming of SEN support and services in polytechnics and the ITEs. 3.15 pm Internships are a big part of ITE and polytechnic education, giving students with critical industry exposure and experience to complement their learning. These are significant as they offer hands-on experience, helping these students apply classroom skills into real-world, real-life scenarios. This practical exposure builds confidence and allows students to explore their interests and their strengths, helping with career and eventually, life choices. Internships also augment soft skills such as communication, time management and self-directedness, which are essential ingredients for workplace success. These experiences help them thrive in professional environments and enhance social interactions with colleagues as well. Additionally, internships promote independence by teaching students task management and handling responsibilities. I would like to ask what steps are taken to ensure that neurodiverse ITE and polytechnic students going on such internships have their internships calibrated to meet their neurodiversity and differentiated learning needs? SkillsFuture 2.0”
“I had previously made the point in Parliament via Parliamentary Questions relating to the importance of ensuring that our teachers have industry experience and exposure for their own professional growth that will, in turn, enhance the overall teaching and learning of our students. I would now like to ask if MOE can share more on the various programmes that are in place for the professional development of our teachers and if there are any plans to enhance these programmes anytime soon? Internships for Neurodiverse Students Neurodiverse students, including those with conditions like attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, autism or other cognitive variations, learn in ways that are different from learning methods and strategies adopted by neurotypical students. Neurodiverse students' learning styles evolve from their strengths and challenges they face. Each neurodiverse student is different but there are common strategies and approaches can support neurodiverse learners in achieving success. These include, focusing on their strengths, providing assistive technologies, allowing for visual and hands-on learning, and providing extended assessment-time alternative assessments. For students that need social support, there are also strategies for them to overcome anxiety and increase collaboration opportunities with their peers. Much progress has been made in MOE schools with learning support and I am heartened to say this. The SEN Masterplan, our national framework, aims to enhance the quality and accessibility of SEN education. The Masterplan for Inclusive Education was introduced to ensure that children with SEN are integrated into mainstream schools wherever possible and that schools provide appropriate support.”
“As of November 2024, I believe that three JCs, Temasek Junior College, ASRJC and JPJC have been slated to move into new buildings by January 2028. Could MOE provide an update on the exercise to rejuvenate JCs across the island? Professional Development for Teachers Madam, teachers are one of the most critical resources in the teaching ecosystem. In Singapore, continuous teacher training occurs through a system of different professional development opportunities provided by MOE, including paid professional development courses, staff training opportunities, conferences, mentorship programmes, attachments, leadership development tracks and study programmes for further education. There are SkillsFuture courses focusing on specific areas of practice to further teachers' professional growth and I believe that all teachers in Singapore are entitled to 100 hours of paid professional development every year. While a good preliminary foundation has been laid to ensure good training by the National Institute of Education (NIE), which also offers various degree courses and professional development programmes, I believe that continuing education is crucial to keep sharpening skillsets and keeping teachers relevant. The focus on Research-Informed Practices also means that teachers need to update their practice with evidence-based pedagogies and strategies. Also, given the rapid developments in AI, technology and pedagogy and fast-evolving workplace landscape where skills must be practice-oriented, the emphasis must be on ensuring that our teachers improve the quality of their teaching through upskilling and continuous learning for teaching quality excellence throughout their careers.”
“Having the same point system for both also allows for recognition of different learning styles and interests, and alignment of entry points would also allow equality of access to higher education for both polytechnic and JC students to university in the future. Could I suggest that MOE review the post "O" level criteria for JCs to make it more aligned with that of polytechnics? Rejuvenation of Junior Colleges Still on JC, on 20 January 1969, National Junior College, the first JC, had its inaugural assembly with 572 students. It offered 40 subject combinations to students who could exercise wide choices in subject options to meet their interests and inclinations. Following that, several JCs opened their doors, with Hwa Chong Junior College the first Government-aided JC in Singapore, opening in 1974; and Catholic Junior College, starting in 1975 to combine pre-university courses offered by Catholic religious schools or orders. The JC system was created to optimise the use of teachers and laboratory facilities while providing more educational opportunities for pre-university students. It aimed at creating a challenging learning environment and helping students develop their talents academically and non-academically. Madam, in 2019, MOE announced the merger of eight JCs into four, partly to address declining student numbers owing to falling birth rates. The merged JCs – Anderson Serangoon Junior College (ASRJC), Yishun Innova Junior College, Tampines Meridian Junior College and Jurong Pioneer Junior College (JPJC) – adopted names that combined the full names of the original colleges, with the name of the older JC coming first to reflect its history.”
“Thank you, Madam. Before I begin, I would like to declare my position as a chief executive officer of an education institution. In Singapore, the majority of students' typical pattern of education after completing their "O" level is generally a binary one. They either attend a junior college (JC) or a polytechnic. The key distinction between these two routes lies in the type of education they offer, with JCs focusing on academic study that leads to the "A" levels and, often, university after that; and polytechnics providing vocational and technical training through a diploma programme, with increasing pathways to university education too. In the 1970s, the L1R5 system, or the calculation of a student's aggregate score was based on their best language subject (L1) and five relevant academic subjects (R5). This system moved in 1980 to the L1R4 system. The number of relevant subjects for which the aggregate score was counted was reduced from five to four. This shift was aimed at streamlining admissions for increased focus on core subjects and specialised skills. The L1R4 system applied to both polytechnic and JC admissions, but the subjects counted could differ. There was a return to the L1R5 system for JC admission a few years later. And presently, I believe that there are two systems, L1R4 for polytechnic admission and L1R5 for JC admission. It might be good, in my humble opinion, to ensure parity between the two systems, especially with students opting for both JCs and polytechnics in their same application form as they make their initial choices. As learning becomes more personalised and catered to students' interests and choices become more diverse, having one aggregate calculation system based on L1R4 would also narrow the JC-polytechnic perceived divide.”
“But while we bask in a general mood of celebrations, let us not forget that there are dark clouds gathering on our horizon and take heed that SG60 did not happen because it is meant to happen, but rather, it happened because we, collectively, as a country made it happen. SG60 belongs to all Singaporeans, past and present, and to everyone who has, in their own way, made this happen. I hope that Singapore will continue to defy the odds, thrive in this age of uncertainty and be an exemplar of how a country can stand united, with every member of the society being given the support and opportunity to succeed, regardless of our station in life. I thus end my speech in firm support of the Budget, Sir.”