Desmond Lee
Singapore
“The Leadership, Enrichment, Achievement, Participation and Service (LEAPS) 2.0 is a framework for recognising student participation and achievement in secondary school co-curricular programmes.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) is mindful of the impact that rising temperatures may have on our students, teachers and officials taking part in the National School Games. Matches are scheduled only after students have had the time to train and become progressively more heat acclimatised.”
“As shared in Parliament in March 2026, the proportion of students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools has remained stable, at around 7% of the overall student population. This stability is observed across both primary and secondary schools.”
“The Ministry recruits and assesses applicants based on merit and suitability for the teaching profession, regardless of gender. We look for individuals with a passion for teaching, a belief in the potential of every child, and who possess the values and character to make a positive difference in students' lives.”
“Over the past five years, an average of 750 teachers resigned from the Education Service annually, representing a resignation rate of around 2%.”
“MOE has also progressively strengthened open access within the Primary 1 Registration Framework through Phase 2C, which is open to students regardless of whether they have prior connections to the school. MOE had increased the number of reserved Phase 2C places from zero to 20 in 2014; and from 20 to 40 in 2022.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,698 lines we hold for Desmond Lee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 74.
“In this case, the LEA supports students to iteratively improve their writing with more engaging content and vivid language, to strengthen their writing skills. The LEA gives every student an individual AI writing coach that responds to our students in real-time, based on their specific drafts. As a guardrail, the LEA will redirect students back on track if they veer off-topic and ask irrelevant questions, or if they want to be spoon-fed with direct answers. Last year, my colleagues and I tried it out. We were in a class, there was a particular topic, and we deliberately tried to go off course and say "What is good in the canteen?" or "How can I use this topic for a party trick?" And they will tell us to say "No, this is not relevant. Please let's get back on topic. Let's learn about" this and that. At the same time, our teachers can reinforce our students’ AI literacy during lesson consolidation by guiding them to form good learning habits when using AI. As students learn to use AI and learn with AI, they will also learn more about what AI is. They are taught how it works, how to be discerning about AI output and the importance of being responsible for the content that they create. During Cyber Wellness lessons, students are taught to be discerning about AI output as it may contain errors or false information and the importance of being responsible for the content they create. Prior to using AI tools in SLS, students go through the “Basic Module on AI and AI-enabled Features in SLS”, to teach them about the tools in SLS and how to use them for learning. From Primary 4, students undergo the mandatory 10 hours "Code for Fun" programme – it is coding for fun, but it is mandatory.”
“From Primary 1 to 3, physical, tactile, hands-on learning is prioritised as students build foundational knowledge and develop cognitive and social skills. But students learn about the basics of AI – so, AI literacy – so that they are aware of its presence in their daily lives, but schools will not assign any work that requires them to use AI directly. From Primary 4, our students would have developed foundational literacy, numeracy and basic foundational knowledge of AI in their daily lives. Research also shows that at around this age, they would have developed some executive functioning skills – like planning, task initiation and ability to evaluate their own thinking – to begin to use simple digital tools to support their learning. We will therefore let them use educational AI tools under teacher supervision. Students in Primary 4 to 6 will only use AI tools in school that are specifically designed for education. And they will only do so under teacher supervision. This includes the AI-enabled tools that we have introduced into the Singapore Student Learning Space (SLS) which are specially designed to help our children and students learn. These tools have in-built safety guardrails. For example, Primary 4 students in an English Language class can use the AI Learning Assistant (LEA) in SLS for composition writing in class. Using the prompts provided by their teacher, our students can get ideas on how to "show not tell", a technique where students enhance their writing through details on actions and emotions to help readers better experience the narrative, and refine their drafts based on personalised feedback from the LEA.”
“Thank you, Sir. My response will also address related oral and written Parliamentary Questions scheduled for the Sitting on and after 7 May. Sir, artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly accessible, not just on the Internet but also embedded in hardware and even toys. General purpose AI is also easily available online. It is therefore important for students, even younger ones, to develop overall awareness of AI in daily life, have guided discussions on its benefits and risks, and be ready to use AI. AI is going to cause disruption and create opportunity, and we want to prepare our children well and equip them with the knowledge and skills to meet this new world. The Ministry of Education's (MOE’s) approach is simple, but deliberate – for every student to learn about AI, learn to use AI, learn with AI and most importantly, learn beyond AI. These are what we call the "Four Learns". Theoretical knowledge alone is not sufficient. Our students also need well-designed and supervised hands-on experiences, through the use of educational AI tools guided by teachers. This spiral approach, as students progress through different levels in school, prepares them to harness AI to benefit their learning, critically evaluate AI output and guard against risks such as cognitive offloading. We want to develop AI literacy in our students in a calibrated and purposeful way. Our approach is informed by research on how children learn and develop, and what is helpful at each stage of growth. Technology, including AI, is used only when it supports educational objectives and students’ development. This has guided us when introducing AI in our schools.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to address oral Question Nos 2 to 5 on today’s Order Paper together?”
“We take food waste seriously because it is an environmental concern. In the context of school meals, food waste gives us an indication of whether students are taking well to the food from the school canteen. The same concern applies regardless whether the school is operating under the Individual Stallholder System or the Central Kitchen Meal Model (CKMM). In the CKMM schools, our observations so far indicate that wastage patterns vary depending on several factors, including dish popularity, portion sizes and student receptivity to new menu items. Food items like vegetables and fruits tend to see higher waste, which is a pattern we also observe in canteens operating traditional stalls. The Ministry of Education and schools are working closely with the three CKMM operators to continually refine meals based on students' feedback. Even though operators and schools cannot satisfy all taste preferences, we are taking measures such as replacing less popular dishes, offering smaller portion sizes relative to the age group, and making healthier options more appealing in presentation and preparation. We also work closely with the Health Promotion Board to balance nutritional requirements and taste, so that students will enjoy their meals and waste less food. On food waste data, we have been actively collecting observations since the CKMM's rollout, and are in the process of establishing baseline measurements.”
“Students can take up to three Applied Learning Modules (ApLMs) during their secondary education. Students do not have to pay for ApLMs as the Ministry of Education (MOE) provides schools with grants to cover ApLM costs. ApLMs offered by polytechnics and Institute of Technical Education (ITE) span six broad clusters. These are Business, Engineering, Information Technology, Hospitality and Tourism, Mathematics and Science, and Media and Design. Schools register for their preferred modules on the ApLM portal. Schools can also engage the services of private vendors to customise and deliver other applied learning experiences as another form of ApLM. More than four in five secondary schools enrol students in ApLM programmes each year. Schools with more students progressing to polytechnics and ITEs tend to have higher take-up rates. MOE does not track the take-up rate across student profiles.”
“MOE will work with our schools, families and the wider community to create environments where every child feels safe, valued and supported to reach their full potential.”
“Where additional expertise and support is needed in specific areas or to deal with complex cases, schools can tap on the needs-based funding to hire additional manpower or seek support and advice from their respective Cluster Superintendents. On community partners, MOE recognises that the cultivation of values such as kindness, empathy and respect in our children requires efforts beyond the school environment. We are grateful for community partners who share this commitment. For example, the Singapore Kindness Movement partners schools through programmes, such as Friends of Singa, Kindsville initiatives and Kindness Day SG, which encourage students to lead kindness initiatives. The Centre for Fathering works with fathers to strengthen family bonds so that children feel secure turning to their parents when they face difficulties. We encourage community partners to share their expertise and initiatives as part of this society-wide effort against bullying. Members have also asked about data, outcome indicators and measures of effectiveness. First, we will keep track of the implementation of these recommendations through regular engagements with educators and parents, as well as focus group discussions. Second, we will continue to watch student management outcomes. In terms of data on bullying incidence, as a baseline, bullying incidents in the last five years averaged three incidents per 1,000 primary school students and eight per 1,000 secondary school students per year. We will study these outcomes and review if more needs to be done. I thank Members for their interest in this issue. While schools play a central role in creating a safe, caring and enabling environment for our students, addressing hurtful behaviours and bullying takes a whole of society effort.”
“The broader intent is always to enable affected students to regain their confidence and restore their sense of safety and belonging. For students with SEN or mental health conditions who have hurt others, it is especially important to help them understand that such hurtful behaviour may affect others negatively. The consequences are educative, restorative and focused on helping the student learn and behave appropriately. Members have raised concerns about the impact of these recommendations on staff workload. Our intent is to go upstream – to reduce the incidence of bullying and hurtful behaviours, while strengthening and streamlining current practices. In the near term, workload may increase as our schools implement the changes. MOE will therefore provide funding for schools, on a needs-basis, to hire additional manpower to provide support while managing teacher workload. This manpower could include youth workers, pastoral care officers or parent liaison officers. MOE will also bolster support for our school counsellors when managing complex cases. Over time, as process and norms become clearer, workload should stabilise. And if the measures succeed in reducing bullying upstream, the overall burden on our school staff should ease. To streamline case management, MOE is also exploring technological solutions to help reduce the administrative load. For a start, MOE is developing an offence management system to support case investigation, documentation and monitoring. We received suggestions for MOE to set up a centralised anti-bullying unit to support schools in managing egregious cases. We considered this carefully. Our schools are best placed to manage such cases. Our teachers know their students well and understand the dynamics of their school communities.”
“A school-based platform ensures that the platform is age-appropriate, accessible and familiar for students and parents to use. Schools will be provided with guidelines on managing reports received through the different reporting channels. However, urgent cases should still be reported directly to teachers and School Leaders rather than through the online reporting platform, so that prompt action will be taken. Some Members have expressed concern on cyber incidents. MOE recognises the seriousness of cyber incidents, ranging from online harassment to obscene and inappropriate images that may be artificial intelligence-generated. MOE will continue to provide schools with guidance on managing all cyber-related incidents, including fact-finding processes and supporting students in reporting online harms. When the Online Safety Commission (OSC) becomes operational by end-June 2026, victims of certain online harms, such as online harassment, doxxing and intimate image abuse, will be able to seek timely assistance. Schools will support the well-being of students who encounter negative cyber incidents and guide them to report to the OSC. Questions were also raised by Members about incidents involving students with SEN or mental health conditions. While schools uphold disciplinary standards, schools also take into consideration each student's specific needs and circumstances. For students with SEN or mental health conditions who have been hurt, schools will first address the immediate safety concerns. Trained school personnel will also look out for signs of distress that may not be immediately visible or explicitly communicated, and provide timely and appropriate support.”
“Importantly, this approach is part of a framework of disciplinary measures which provides certainty of consequences, even as we support the student perpetrator to learn from the experience. This approach is based on research which shows that children and youth learn to make better choices when there are clear boundaries enforced by firm, meaningful consequences. This has a positive impact on reducing bullying and enables the school community to feel safe to learn in an orderly environment. Caning is meted out for boys only, and as I said earlier, is only for egregious violations. This is aligned to the Education (Schools) Regulations, which only allows caning for male students. This takes reference from the Criminal Procedure Code which states that women shall not be punished with caning. Nonetheless, this does not mean that girls who bully others are less culpable. Our schools adopt a tiered approach to discipline that ensures all students face consequences corresponding to the severity of their actions. Girls could receive consequences such as detention and/or suspension, adjustment of their conduct grade and other school-based consequences. MOE regularly reviews our discipline guidelines, to ensure that our disciplinary measures remain appropriate. We will continue to refine our approach based on ground wisdom and research. I will now address the questions on reporting channels. I shared in this House last September about the various reporting channels available in our schools. The Review reinforced the importance of providing safe and accessible platforms for reporting student well-being concerns. From 2027, each school will have an online reporting platform available for students and parents.”
“In such situations, we encourage parents to report the incident to the school and work with the school to support their child. Should parents have concerns about how an incident is managed, they should share their concerns with the school to better understand the school's approach and work with the school to resolve those concerns. Beyond that, parents can also provide feedback through MOE's online and offline feedback channels. Some Members asked about caning as a disciplinary measure. Studies show that poorly administered and frequent corporal punishment, particularly in unregulated home settings, is associated with negative outcomes. We recognise this, and I want to emphasise that the context in our schools is quite different. Our schools use caning as a disciplinary measure, if all the other measures are inadequate given the gravity of the misconduct. They follow strict protocols to ensure safety for the student. For instance, caning must be approved by the Principal and administered only by authorised teachers. Schools will consider factors, such as the maturity of the student and if caning will help the student learn from his mistake. In MOE's framework, schools exercise discretion on whether to use caning as a disciplinary consequence after assessing the circumstances of the offence committed. If it is used, it is never administered in isolation but always as part of a suite of restorative and disciplinary measures. Schools will monitor the student's well-being and progress after caning and counsel the student to reflect and learn, while supporting the student's rehabilitation.”
“Where affected students require additional support to manage their emotions, they may be referred to school counsellors, Special Educational Needs (SEN) Officers or to the REACH (Response, Early intervention and Assessment in Community mental Health) teams for more specialised support, particularly when persistent distress is identified. We recognise the need for greater consistency in the management of bullying across schools. MOE has provided schools with clearer guidelines on establishing offence management processes and disciplinary measures. As circumstances differ for each case, schools will assess and take appropriate action aligned to these guidelines. All schools will also develop an anti-bullying policy by the end of 2026, based on MOE's guidelines. To ensure case management processes remain calibrated across all schools, MOE will conduct regular focus group discussions, school engagements and reviews. Cluster superintendents, who oversee a group of schools, will provide further guidance and support to schools on the implementation of these processes. Another important aspect pointed out by Members is parent engagement. When a case is reported to the school, the school will maintain timely communication with parents, keeping them informed and partnering them to ensure the safety and well-being of their child. However, schools will require time to look into the incident and establish facts. The time taken will vary based on the complexity of the situation. Nonetheless, when an incident is reported, schools will prioritise immediate safety measures for all students involved. In some cases, students may not report incidents to the school but may share them with their family or friends instead.”
“Schools also have peer support systems, where students learn to support and stand up for one another. Following the Review, we have strengthened CCE lessons with more interactive learning strategies and real-life scenarios. This better equips students to respond when they witness or experience bullying. We have also updated cyber wellness lessons to better address evolving online risks. These changes strengthen students' character and well-being whilst creating a more caring and supportive school environment. Many Members have asked about our schools' disciplinary measures arising from the Review. Our schools' approach to bullying and other forms of student misconduct is fundamentally an educative process. Schools follow a structured process to ensure students' safety and well-being while addressing root causes in a timely and consistent manner. This includes making a Police report for cases which warrant Police attention. Throughout this process, schools work closely with parents, keeping them informed, collaborating on safety measures and prioritising the well-being of the students involved. When incidents are reported, schools investigate before deciding on the appropriate disciplinary and restorative actions. Actions are tiered based on severity – from reflection and detention to suspension or caning for egregious or repeated serious offences. Disciplinary measures are always complemented with counselling and restorative actions, with the aim of helping students learn, change their behaviour and repair their relationships. Safety plans for affected students can include separating the students, removing hurtful online content and arranging for peer support.”
“We will also enhance professional development for our educators and tap on technology to improve case management and facilitate timely communication and intervention when incidents happen. Finally, we will strengthen partnerships with parents, families and the community. Parents and families can reinforce positive values and character at home and partner schools to support their child's development and well-being. We will also work with community partners to promote mutual kindness and respect across all sectors of society. Members asked about the methodology and findings of the Review. MOE looked at research and drew on resources from local and international experts. These included mental health professionals, developmental and educational psychology researchers, sociology researchers and professional mediators. As part of the review, we also engaged various stakeholders, including professionals such as researchers, counsellors and psychologists, as well as School Leaders, school staff, parents and students. We engaged or received feedback from over 2,000 stakeholders in total. There was broad agreement that addressing bullying holistically requires a collective, sustained response involving schools, families and the wider community. Members have asked questions relating to specific areas and recommendations of the Review. I will address these questions by focus areas. Let me start with values education. A key goal of our education system is to develop character and social-emotional skills. As I shared in this House last September, the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum already covers these areas, including respectful behaviour online and offline. CCE equips our students to disagree appropriately, cope with negative behaviour and overcome challenges.”
“My response will address the questions raised by members in relation to the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) Comprehensive Action Review against Bullying. My response will also cover related oral and written Parliamentary Questions set down for today's and subsequent Sittings. MOE, with the support of the COMPASS (COMmunity and PArents in Support of Schools) Council, completed the Comprehensive Action Review against Bullying and announced the recommendations on 15 April. These span four key areas and nine measures, forming a comprehensive whole-of-society approach. Let me briefly outline the four areas. First, we will strengthen values education. Prevention must start upstream. We will place greater emphasis on shaping students' character and social-emotional skills, so they not only know what is right, but understand why it matters. Our schools will also foster a pro-social peer culture where students look out for one another, stand together against hurtful behaviour and support those who are affected. Second, we will strengthen the school environment. Every school must be a safe, caring and enabling environment where every student can learn and grow, where bullying and hurtful behaviour have no place. We will deepen a culture of kindness and respect, and promote empathy and kindness. At the same time, we will take more proactive action – through early identification, better reporting channels, timely intervention and firm discipline for serious cases. Third, we will strengthen school capacity. We will provide schools with additional resources to procure additional manpower, where needed, to support our teachers in student management processes.”
“My response will address the questions raised by Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik on the temporary support for school bus operators amid the ongoing Middle East conflict. The Ministry of Education (MOE) is providing temporary support to operators of regular bus services for primary and special education to help offset higher fuel costs arising from the ongoing Middle East conflict. In April, we provided support equivalent to 13% of school bus fare revenues. Given that fuel prices remain elevated, we intend to provide additional support for May and June. Beyond that, from July, the operators will be allowed to raise fares to reflect the cost increases, so that services remain viable. For ad hoc bus service providers, MOE has advised schools to work with operators on reasonable rate adjustments. As of 28 April 2026, schools have facilitated temporary rate increases for 42 bus contracts, with more under consideration. We also encourage other procurers of transport services to adopt a similar approach, so that the burden is shared fairly. MOE does not plan to take over school bus operations. Under the current model, schools select operators through a competitive bidding process. This allows them to have direct oversight over service quality and affordability, while giving operators the flexibility to customise their services. Where needed, MOE will step in to facilitate continuity – for example, by helping schools put in place replacement arrangements or novate existing contracts. MOE will continue working closely with schools and operators to ensure the sustainability of both regular and ad hoc bus services.”
“My response will also address the Parliamentary Questions raised by Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh and Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong for subsequent sittings. [Please refer to "Resource Allocation for Sports that Lack Pathways to Major Games but Maintain Significant Student Participation and Developmental Value", Official Report, 7 May 2026, Vol 96, Issue 31, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section; and "Inclusion in Major Games Influencing Choice of Sports Offered in National School Games and Advisory Role of SportSG and SpexSG", Official Report, 6 May 2026, Vol 96, Issue 30, Written Answers to Questions section.] The primary objective of physical sports co-curricular activities is to develop our students in character and 21st century competencies through participation in sports. The National School Games (NSG) supports this objective. The Ministry of Education (MOE) considers several factors when determining the inclusion and retention of sports in the NSG to ensure the sustainability of competitions. This includes students' interest levels, participation patterns of schools, availability of facilities, qualified coaches and officials and the ability of sports associations to support the running of the competitions. Whether a sport is in the major Games is not a factor. While some NSG athletes might represent Singapore in the Major Games, this is not an objective of the NSG. As the NSG is a part of the national sports ecosystem, MOE works closely with Sport Singapore and Sport Excellence Singapore when considering the inclusion and retention of sports. For the education conversations, MOE will engage the public and review ideas and suggestions to tackle the "educational arms race" and strengthen holistic development.”
“The University Engineering Scholarships (UES) recognise top polytechnic engineering graduates who pursue engineering or technology-related degrees at the autonomous universities (AUs). The intent is for them to take up jobs in the engineering or technology fields in Singapore. Since the scholarship's inception in 1997, close to 200 scholars have graduated and fulfilled their bond obligations at engineering and technology companies, such as Singapore Technologies Engineering, Micron Technology and Linde Gas Singapore. There are many other engineering scholarships offered by other Government agencies, companies, as well as the AUs. As such, Ministry of Education has no plans to expand the UES' eligibility criteria or introduce a new scholarship scheme.”
“The talent needs for the Singapore space sector are generally met by graduates trained in existing disciplines, such as aerospace, electrical and mechanical engineering, computer engineering, computer science and data science. Some of our institutes of higher learning (IHLs) have also introduced space-related specialisations within existing courses. For example, Ngee Ann Polytechnic recently announced a Space Technology specialisation for third-year engineering students. Similarly, the National University of Singapore (NUS) offers the Space Technology Specialisation for electrical and computer engineering students. Singaporean students enrolled in these courses already benefit from significant subsidies for their education. To further support the development of Singaporean talent, the National Space Agency of Singapore (NSAS) supports student training through projects, like NUS's Galassia CubeSat programme, where students get to design satellite missions. The Space Technology Development Programme administered by NSAS also supports the training and employment of researchers, scientists and engineers under qualifying research and development programmes within the IHLs and research institutions. These professionals could support the development and delivery of space-related curricula for students.”
“The GCE O-Level examination uses a nine-point grading system, while the A-Level examination uses a seven-point grading system. Grades A1 to C6 for GCE O-Level and grades A to E for GCE A-Level are considered subject passes. The pass grades in GCE O- and A-Level examinations indicate students' eligibility for post-secondary courses and enable Post-Secondary Education Institutions to make admission decisions on subject area specialisation. For example, students need to pass Mathematics to be eligible for courses, like engineering, at the polytechnics and universities. The Primary School Leaving Examination's (PSLE's) Achievement Level (AL) grading system uses an eight-point grading system, AL1 to AL8. The PSLE is a placement examination where the results indicate which educational programme each student is ready for. Hence, the PSLE does not use a pass-fail nomenclature as there is a progression path for all students.”
“Private education institutions should work with industry to regularly review their curriculum and course offerings for relevance to potential employers. This positions their graduates to secure good jobs post-graduation. To help prospective students to make informed decisions on their education choices and pathways, SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) conducts and publishes the results of the Private Education Institution (PEI) Graduate Employment Survey annually. However, SSG does not review or endorse the quality of PEIs and their programmes. To support Singaporeans, including PEI graduates, in their job search, the Government provides a range of programmes, including career matching services through Workforce Singapore's Careers Connect and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute's career centres, SkillsFuture training and conversion programmes and Government-funded traineeships.”
“The Graduate Employment Surveys conducted by the various Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) cover graduates from all full-time Pre-Employment Training programmes, including adult learners. The Ministry of Education monitors the outcomes for other funded continuing education and training (CET) programmes, including part-time programmes at the IHLs, via surveys and studies using administrative data. For part-time full qualification programmes at the IHLs, given the diversity in adult learner profiles, we conduct econometric studies to understand the causal links between their participation in the programmes and employment outcomes. For instance, the Ministry of Trade and Industry published a study in 2024 that used administrative data to show that learners who completed Academic CET post-diploma programmes at the Polytechnics, which are generally conducted on a part-time basis, enjoyed a wage premium of up to 11%, when compared to a control group of individuals with similar profiles. Wage and employment outcomes do not tell us the full picture. Reskilling may have helped workers, who were otherwise at risk of displacement, keep their jobs or take on new job roles within their existing organisations. To complement employment outcomes reporting, SkillsFuture Singapore also administers the Training Quality and Outcomes Measures survey for SkillsFuture funded programmes, which includes whether the training has helped learners to be more effective at their jobs, improved their work performance or allowed them to take on enhanced responsibilities at work.”
“On the Member's first question, I recall in September, we also had this discussion. When a student has to be suspended, part of it could be, as a safety planning arrangement, to have the perpetrator removed from the class or from the school. Part of it could be punitive in nature to say, "Well, because of this behaviour, after investigation, you are suspended from coming to school to learn." But as the Member rightly pointed out, for some students, they may not perceive that as being punitive. They do not feel that they are being deprived of something and do not feel that these are worthwhile consequences that cause them to want to behave better. And therefore, there is also, in-school suspension and school teachers, form teachers and School Leaders will know their students' background well and know how to position the application of these disciplinary measures in the way that reinforces that there are consequences for serious misconduct. On fear of retaliation, there are, therefore, a whole range of school measures from peer support leaders being brought in; in addition, of course, school arrangements by staff to look after students who stand up or who report incidents that happen to them. And, of course, there are consequences if retaliation then leads to offences that are investigated. 12.45 pm”
“I thank the Member for her two questions. On the longitudinal tracking of victims and alleged perpetrators, the school will have very close proximity with the students concerned. They will have a sense of whether a child learns from his or her mistake after the disciplinary and corrective and educative steps are put in place, and observe the child for the duration of his or her time in school. We will see how best to track this on the longer term, to look at overall recidivism rates. With regard to victims as well, particularly, if the student has been a victim of a serious incident of bullying, counsellors will keep an eye. They work closely with not just the child concerned but also with the families as well.”
“The answer to one is that we, as I said, discipline, whether it is corrective, punitive, ultimately, it has to be educative in nature. So, disciplinary measures are always followed through with reflection, with counselling and so on and so forth. On his second question, the answer is yes.”
“One may recall an unfortunate incident in 2024, where some secondary school students created AI-generated deep fakes of female students, obscene nudes – they were identified and they were dealt with firmly, not just through Police investigation but also by school disciplinary action.”
“On the Member's first question, let me discuss with my colleagues what additional material might be useful for our schools as well as for the public to understand, in terms of the basis for various recommendations. On her second question about AI-generated fake obscene videos, I think I mentioned it in my reply that MOE will work closely with our schools to address these issues. I did a check. Such technology is relatively recent, over the last few years. And therefore, these new actions would involve an increase – from zero to a certain number. The numbers still remain small, but we are keeping a very close eye on it and with the formation of the OSC from next month, we work closely with them to help our students and help parents tackle such incidents as they arise. Of course, to the extent that perpetrators are students, the culture building, the establishment of norms, the education on cyber wellness and how to use these powerful tools ethically and appropriately and legally will be very important. But to the extent that these instances have occurred, I have mentioned that we will work with the families and the students, support them, work with the authorities like the OSC to have them taken down. It is not an easy task because there could be proliferation around different platforms, so that work will have to be not just immediate but follow through for some time yet. And the Member asked what if the perpetrator is not known because these are people hiding behind the technological tools, then we may need to work with not just the OSC but with the Police.”
“On the Member's second question, I think this is beyond the remit of today's focus, which is on general education. And of course, I can give an answer but our IHLs are autonomous, especially the autonomous universities, and they have their disciplinary mechanisms and approaches, there is a certain strand that runs through all of them. But I think it would beyond the limited time we have. So, I urge the Member to file another question to allow us to explain the approach in IHLs with regard to young adults. On her first question about transparency and accountability, she is right on that point, because that is a mark of whether the trust is upheld between home and school – and that is something that we strive to upkeep with these latest series of enhancements to our framework. With regard to formal apologies, there are some schools which will facilitate, as part of restorative practice, an opportunity to bring the two children or two young people together, or more if the incident involves more people, to try to bring closure when they are ready, particularly the student who has been subject to the bullying or hurtful behaviour. Sometimes it is written, sometimes it is oral but over time as we work more closely with restorative practice practitioners, we will be able to refine and improve on this aspect of closure. Because, ultimately, most of the time the students will have to remain in a learning environment and have to learn from what has happened – on the one hand to curb bad behaviour, on the other to strengthen one's resilience.”
“It is more important to take an upstream approach or midstream approach and see if there are concerning behaviours that need to be addressed early. So, certainly, we do not want to crowd out the serious cases, but we must not ignore the small little, matters that can then blow up over time.”
“On the Member's first question, our teachers and our School Leaders seek to investigate the facts, objectively try to address the incident – on the one hand support the affected child and on the other, making sure that the actor of the misconduct or alleged misconduct is dealt with appropriately. So, not just discipline but also an opportunity to reflect and learn. And that is why his question emphasises why the relationship between parents and school is so important because in a small number of cases, unfortunately, parents' concern for the child results in a certain level of acrimony and adversarial approach taken by a parent of one child against the other child, who is viewed as the perpetrator. That can be very emotional. We fully understand parents' feelings and emotions when their child has been hurt or subject to hurtful behaviour or bullied, and the parent, of course, would expect certain things to be done. But our schools and our teachers want to make sure that we address this fairly, even if firmly. So, we seek parents' support and understanding. Of course, our teachers will endeavour to do their best to build a positive relationship with not just the child but also with the parents at home. If there is a need to escalate the matter, then certainly the School Leader and beyond that, the Cluster Superintendent and Zonal Director – these are people with experience who can be called upon through the MOE reporting channels to look into the matter. On the Member's other question about how to ensure that minor cases do not crowd out more serious cases, certainly, we want to make sure that we look at the serious cases whilst not allowing minor incidents to then fester and become the shoots of more serious incidents, because it is better to nip in the bud.”
“And that is why our partnerships with Family Service Centres, with the Social Service Offices (SSOs) as well as mental health agencies in the community, are so important.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, on the first question on CCE, during our engagement sessions, one which I attended, parents spoke about whether we could look at more recent incidents in the school, and after the passing of a certain amount of time, use those relatively fresh experiences in the school to make the CCE lesson come alive – because it is very real, it is not hypothetical, it is not anonymised from some other place. We looked at that and we felt that there was merit in that suggestion by some parents. Therefore, we have enhanced CCE so that there is role playing, there are more realistic scenarios and allow the children to take on different roles in order for them to do better perspective-taking and strengthen the sense of empathy, and allow them to not just experience the emotions, but also what it is to be an upstander, and what it is to seek help if you are playing the role of the victim. Or if you are a student, to be able to understand what kinds of words hurt, what kind of actions cut. And so that is how our CCE is being expanded. Of course, there are other aspects of CCE and other curriculum throughout the whole school year where we teach students about cyber wellness, cyber well-being, and in learning about these technologies, they also learn how to use it appropriately when interacting with one another. The Member's other point about families who face complex challenges at home that may manifest in terms of the child's behaviour, whether it is parentified behaviour, whether it is permissive parenting, whether it is a negative influence in the community or in the neighbourhood – this is something which our teachers will be more in touch with our students on; that is why the home-school partnership is so important.”
“We will have SEN officers in school, we have counsellors, we have school welfare officers and we have access to the REACH teams as well as external social, as well as health and mental health providers in the community so that we ensure a proper oversight when administering any form of discipline or any form of rehabilitative and corrective measures for our children.”
“I want to thank the Member for his two good questions. The first, it is that perennial tussle or balance that has to be struck, not just in our schools, but in society as a whole – between ensuring consistency and standardisation versus giving safety valves, versus giving discretion for our schools and for figures of authority to assess each case on its circumstances and on its merits. And certainly, in the context of a school which is fundamentally an educational institution, not just cognitively, but also socio-emotionally and in terms of values, we want to look at the children concerned as well; look at whether they have special needs, mental health challenges, whether they have challenges at home, or whether they are under peer pressure, and so on and so forth. And so, it is always that balance between consistency and fairness, that principle, versus providing discretion to ensure that discipline ultimately has education as its core goal. And so, our schools have been given clearer guidelines, some benchmarks to look at for different kinds of offences. Necessarily, there will need to be discretion. Facts will differ, gravity of the acts will differ. And therefore, they will exercise discretion, but with our cluster arrangements, and with more frequent sharing and conferencing amongst each other, we will be able to take a look and make sure that on the whole, we address fairness while ensuring that each case is dealt with appropriately on its merits. The other question the Member raised is on oversight, whether a child has those needs like education needs or mental health. Our teachers and our form teachers will know their children, will know their students.”
“And it also involves taking care of children with special needs or mental health challenges who may have challenges behaving in norms that we would otherwise expect. So, we have to be inclusive in that regard as well.”
“I would say the data that we have provided, as the Member pointed out, is based on what is reported. And so, when you look at this data, we are mindful that there can be overreporting and underreporting. Overreporting in the sense that from the child's perspective, they feel that they have been hurt. But again, it depends on their personal threshold and what we feel requires intervention. So, there might be some overreporting. But there certainly may be underreporting. A child decides not to report for various reasons, or tells friends and parents, and the matter is not raised to the school's attention or is not picked up by our schools. So, we look at this data, but we also need to make sure that in every school, our school leaders are on top of the situation and are mindful of what is happening in the classrooms and outside the classrooms. When we put in these measures, when there is greater awareness across the board, across society, among parents, among students, among peer support leaders, among educators, one could well expect that with that greater awareness and willingness to speak up and address this issue, more are reported. Not to mention that from next year, all schools should have online reporting platforms to supplement the face-to-face reporting to school leaders, peer support leaders, as well as teachers. As to whether or not bringing the numbers down should be a meaningful key performance index, obviously, it is something that we want to watch, but it requires not just a downstream intervention and measures, but a lot of the work has to be upstream. It has to be about culture building. It is about the child and his or her understanding of how to relate to one another.”
“I thank the Member for his questions. On his first question, if a parent feels strongly that the child needs to change seating, change class, change school, please work closely with our schools. And if needed, they will activate MOE to look at the specific circumstances and see what immediate safety plans need to be put in place and what longer-term arrangements need to be made. On the Member's second question, I believe the OSC will take also a child-centered approach to understand cyber incidents, cyberbullying, cyber harassment – not just in relation to adults but also for children. And as I have said, we will work closely with parents, with schools, as well as the OSC when such incidents arise.”
“In terms of data on bullying incidence, as a baseline, bullying incidents in the last five years averaged three incidents per 1,000 in our primary school students and eight per 1,000 secondary school students per year. We will study these outcomes and trends, and review if more needs to be done. We thank Members for their interest in this issue. While schools play a central role in creating a safe, caring and enabling environment for our students and teachers, addressing hurtful behaviour and bullying takes a whole-of-society effort. MOE will work with our schools, families and the wider community to create environments where every child feels safe, valued and supported to reach their full potential.”
“We have received suggestions for MOE to set up a centralised anti-bullying unit to support our schools in managing egregious cases. We considered this carefully. Our schools are best placed to manage such cases and MOE Headquarters (HQ) will support our schools. Our teachers know their students well and understand the dynamics of their school communities. Where additional expertise and support is needed in specific areas or to deal with complex cases, our schools can tap on the needs-based funding to hire additional manpower or seek support and advice from their respective Cluster Superintendents. On community partners, MOE recognises that the cultivation of values such as kindness, empathy and respect in our children requires efforts well beyond the school environment. We are grateful for community partners who share this commitment. For example, the Singapore Kindness Movement partners schools through programmes, such as Friends of Singa, Kindsville initiatives and Kindness Day SG, which encourage students to lead kindness initiatives. The Centre for Fathering works with fathers to strengthen family bonds so that children feel secure turning to their parents when they face difficulties. We encourage community partners to share their expertise and initiatives as part of this society-wide effort against bullying. Members have also asked about data, outcome indicators and measures of effectiveness. First, we will keep track of the implementation of these recommendations through regular engagements with educators and parents, as well as focus group discussions. Second, we will continue to watch student management outcomes.”
“Trained school personnel will also look out for signs of distress that may not be immediately visible or explicitly communicated, and provide timely and appropriate support. The broader intent is always to enable affected students to regain their confidence and restore their sense of safety and well-being. For students with SEN or mental health conditions who have hurt others, it is especially important to help them understand that such hurtful behaviour may affect others negatively. The consequences are educative, restorative and focused on helping the student learn and behave appropriately. Members have also raised concerns about the impact of these recommendations on our staff workload. Our intent is to go upstream, to reduce the incidence of bullying and hurtful behaviour, while strengthening and streamlining current practices. In the near term, of course, workload may increase as our schools implement these changes. MOE will, therefore, provide funding for our schools, on a needs-basis, to hire additional manpower or services to provide support while managing teacher workload. This manpower could include youth workers, restorative practitioners, pastoral care officers or parent liaison officers. MOE will also bolster support for our school counsellors when managing complex cases. Over time, as processes and norms become clearer, workload ought to stabilise. And if the measures succeed in reducing bullying upstream, then the overall burden on our school staff ought to ease. To streamline case management, MOE is also exploring technological solutions to help reduce the administrative load. For a start, MOE is developing an offence management system to support case investigation, documentation and monitoring.”
“The Review reinforced the importance of providing safe and accessible platforms for reporting students' well-being concerns. From 2027, each school will have an online reporting platform available for students and parents. A school-based platform ensures that the platform is age-appropriate, accessible and familiar for students and parents to use. Schools will be provided with guidelines on managing reports received through the different reporting channels. However, urgent cases should still be reported directly to teachers and School Leaders rather than through the online reporting platform, so that prompt action can be taken. Some Members have expressed concern on cyber incidents. MOE recognises the seriousness of cyber incidents, ranging from online harassment to obscene and inappropriate images that may be artificial intelligence (AI)-generated. MOE will continue to provide schools with guidance on managing all cyber-related incidents, including fact-finding processes and supporting students in reporting online harms. When the Online Safety Commission (OSC) becomes operational by the end of next month, June 2026, victims of certain online harms, such as online harassment, doxxing and intimate image abuse, will be able to seek more timely assistance. Our schools will support the well-being of students who encounter negative cyber incidents and guide them to report to the OSC. Questions were also raised by Members about incidents involving students with SEN or mental health conditions. While schools uphold disciplinary standards, our schools also take into consideration each student's specific needs and circumstances. For students with SEN or mental health conditions who have been hurt, schools will first address the immediate safety concerns.”
“Schools will monitor the student's well-being and progress after caning and counsel the student to reflect and learn, while supporting the student's rehabilitation. Importantly, this approach is part of a framework of disciplinary measures which provides certainty of consequences, even as we support the student who committed the misconduct to learn from the experience. This approach is based on research which shows that children and youths learn to make better choices when there are clear boundaries enforced by firm, meaningful consequences. This has a positive impact on reducing bullying and enables the school community to feel safe to learn in an orderly environment. Caning is meted out for boys only and, as I said earlier, only for egregious violations. This is aligned to the Education (Schools) Regulations, which only allows caning for male students. This takes reference from the Criminal Procedure Code, which states that women shall not be punished with caning. Nonetheless, this does not mean that girls who bully or engage in hurtful behaviour are less culpable. Our teachers and schools adopt a tiered approach to discipline that ensures that all students face consequences corresponding to the severity of their actions. Girls could receive consequences, for instance, such as detention and/or suspension, adjustment of their conduct grade and other school-based consequences. MOE regularly reviews our discipline guidelines, to ensure that our disciplinary measures remain appropriate. We will continue to receive feedback and refine our approach based on ground wisdom and research. I will now address the questions on reporting channels. I shared in this House last September about the various reporting channels available in our schools.”
“In some cases, students may not report incidents to the school but may share them with their family or friends instead. In such situations, we encourage parents to report the incident to the school and work with the school to support their child. Should parents have concerns about how an incident is being managed, they should share their concerns with the school to better understand the school's approach and work with the school to resolve these concerns. Beyond that, parents can also provide feedback through MOE's online as well as offline feedback channels. Some Members asked about caning as a disciplinary measure. This is not a new measure; it has been around for quite a long time. Studies show that poorly administered and frequent corporal punishment, particularly in unregulated settings, such as at home, is associated with negative outcomes. We recognise this, and I want to emphasise that the context in our schools is quite different. Our schools use caning as a disciplinary measure if all the other measures are inadequate, given the gravity of the misconduct. They follow strict protocols to ensure safety for the student. For instance, caning must be approved by the Principal and administered only by authorised teachers. Schools will consider factors, such as the maturity of the student and if caning will help the student learn from his mistake and understand the gravity of what he has done. In MOE's framework, schools exercise discretion on whether to use caning as a disciplinary consequence after assessing the circumstances of the offence committed. If it is used, it is never administered in isolation but always as part of a suite of restorative and disciplinary measures.”
“Safety plans for affected students can include separating the students, removing hurtful online content and arranging for peer support. Where affected students require additional support to manage their emotions, they may be referred to school counsellors, Special Educational Needs (SEN) officers or to the Response, Early intervention and Assessment in Community mental Health (REACH) teams for more specialised support, particularly when persistent distress is identified. We recognise the need for greater consistency in the management of bullying across our schools. MOE has provided our schools with clearer guidelines on establishing offence management processes and disciplinary measures. As circumstances differ for each case, our schools will assess and take appropriate action aligned to these guidelines. All schools will also develop an anti-bullying policy by the end of this year that is based on MOE's guidelines. To ensure case management processes remain calibrated across all our schools, MOE will conduct regular focus group discussions, school engagements and reviews. Our Cluster Superintendents, who oversee a group of schools, will provide further guidance and support to schools on the implementation of these processes. Another important aspect pointed out by Members is parent engagement. When a case is reported to the school, the schools will maintain timely communication with parents, keeping them informed and partnering them to ensure the safety and well-being of their child. However, schools will require time to look into the incident and establish facts. The time taken will vary based on the complexity of the situation. Nonetheless, when an incident is reported, schools will prioritise immediate safety measures for all students involved.”
“CCE equips our students to disagree appropriately, cope with negative behaviour and overcome challenges. Schools also have peer support systems, where students learn to support and stand up for one another. Following the Review, we have strengthened our CCE lessons with more interactive learning strategies and real-life scenarios. This better equips students to respond when they witness or experience bullying and other hurtful behaviour. We have also updated cyber wellness lessons to better address evolving online risks. These changes strengthen students' character and well-being whilst creating a more caring and supportive school environment. Many Members have also asked about our schools' disciplinary measures arising from the Review. Our schools' approach to bullying and other forms of student misconduct is fundamentally an educative process. Schools follow a structured process to ensure students' safety and well-being while addressing root causes in a timely and consistent manner. This includes making a police report for cases which warrant police attention. Throughout this process, our schools work closely with parents, keeping them informed, collaborating on safety measures and prioritising the well-being of the students involved. When incidents are reported, schools investigate before deciding on the appropriate disciplinary and restorative actions. Actions are tiered based on severity – from reflection and detention to suspension or caning for egregious or repeated serious offences. Disciplinary measures are always complemented with counselling and restorative actions, with the aim of helping our students learn, change their behaviour and repair damaged relationships.”
“Finally, we will strengthen partnerships with parents, families and the community because bullying and hurtful behaviour cannot be seen purely in the school context alone but must be seen in a context of what happens at home, in the community and in society. Parents and families can reinforce positive values and character at home and partner our schools to support their child's development and well-being. We will also work with community partners to promote mutual kindness and respect across all sectors of society. Members asked about the methodology and findings of the Review. MOE looked at research and drew on resources from local and international experts and sources. These included mental health professionals, developmental and educational psychology researchers, sociology researchers and professional mediators. As part of the Review, we also engaged various stakeholders, including professionals, such as researchers, counsellors and psychologists, as well as school leaders, school staff, parents and students. We engaged or received feedback from over 2,000 stakeholders in total. There was broad agreement that addressing bullying holistically requires a collective, sustained response involving our schools, our families and the wider community. Members have asked a wide range of questions relating to specific areas and recommendations of the Review. I will address these questions by focus areas. Let me start with values education. A key goal of our education system is to develop character and social-emotional skills. As I shared in this House last September, the character and citizenship education (CCE) curriculum already covers these areas, including respectful behaviour online and offline.”
“My response will also cover related oral and written Parliamentary Questions set down for today's and subsequent Sittings. Sir, MOE, with the support of the COMmunity and PArents in Support of Schools (COMPASS) Council, completed the Comprehensive Action Review Against Bullying and announced the recommendations on 15 April this year. These span four key areas and nine measures, forming a comprehensive whole-of-society approach. Let me briefly outline the four areas. First, we will strengthen values education. Prevention must begin upstream. We will place greater emphasis on shaping students' character and social-emotional skills, so that they not only know what is right, but understand why it matters. Our schools will also foster a pro-social peer culture, where students look out for one another, be upstanders, stand together against hurtful behaviour and support those who are affected. Second, we will strengthen the school culture and environment. Every school must be a safe, caring and enabling environment where every student can learn and grow, where bullying and hurtful behaviour have no place. We will deepen a culture of kindness and respect and promote empathy and kindness. At the same time, we will take more proactive action through early identification, better reporting channels, timely intervention and firm discipline for serious cases. Third, we will strengthen school capacity. We will provide our schools with additional resources to procure additional manpower and services, where needed, to support our teachers in student management processes. We will also enhance professional development for our educators and tap on technology to improve case management and facilitate timely communication and intervention when incidents happen.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, my response will address the questions raised by Members in relation to the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) Comprehensive Action Review Against Bullying. May I seek your permission to answer oral Question Nos 7 to 29, as well as written Question Nos 41 to 49 on today's Order Paper?”
“The autonomous universities (AUs) collaborate with a wide range of international partners in education and research. This allows our AUs and students to benefit from the experiences of reputable universities around the world, while also contributing to knowledge creation in areas of mutual benefit. For example, some AUs have established joint PhD programmes with Chinese universities. These programmes are open to students from both the AUs and Chinese universities, regardless of nationality.”