Tay Eng Soon
Singapore
“Sir, up to now, the numbers involved are very small. Quite often, it is a small group, together with the lecturers, who work out the project. In other words, it is their initiative. Included in that is fund-raising, which they do.”
“The universities are also planning to introduce a modular and semester system for some of their courses. This will enable their students to do part of their course in overseas universities and gain credits for these modules towards the fulfilment of their degree requirements in NUS and NTU.”
“The polytechnic graduates who go overseas are quite a mixed group of people. Many of them do have working experience. In fact, they save the income from their working experience before they go overseas. So many do have working experience before they go overseas. PRE-SCHOOL CLASSES RUN BY PRIVATE ORGANISATIONS (Regulation) 8.”
“I think this is something which we can ask the universities to look into. Mr Umar Abdul Hamid: Does the Ministry have statistics to show that graduates who went overseas do have industrial experience before they get into the university?”
“Sir, the experience of the universities with polytechnic graduates is that they do well when they have practical working experience in addition to the diploma course that they have done.”
“They may not be highly educated themselves. Many of them are, in fact, not rich at all. They are refugees. But they pay attention to what their children do, they encourage them, they supervise them where they can, and as a result of that kind of encouragement, the children concentrate on their work and they do well in the American system.…”
The complete record
Every one of 520 lines we hold for Tay Eng Soon, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 11.
“I am not giving way. The Member talks about something being very wrong with our education system. Let us have the facts. Let him substantiate the statements and I hope in future he will do so because I am not giving way to him to say anything now. But where are his facts? He makes innuendoes about ad hoc changes. He makes innuendoes about the Ministry and its systems engineers, casting slurs again on highly professional officers that we have in the civil service. Obviously, he does not know anything about the Goh Keng Swee Report that was debated for four days in this House. I do not believe he has even read it. He has not understood the background in which education has evolved in this country and the changes that have had to take place because of this evolution. We are a country that has undergone rapid changes in the last 20 years. First, we have four language streams, four types of schools in Singapore. We have evolved to a bilingual system. We have had a growing trend of parents who wanted to send their children to English-medium schools and so there had to be changes. Teachers had to be recruited to meet these changes. School buildings had to be put up at great speed. All these changes have had to take place. And the Member is saying that the Ministry of Education is making changes, making changes. If we did not make these changes, we would not be where we are today. Let us look at the facts rather than listen to innuendoes which the Member has just been spouting. The fact is, even in the last four years with the implementation of the new education system, there is already a perceptible reduction in the number of pupils dropping out from our school system. Only a few days ago, I gave some information on this.”
“What does he know about the education system when his children never went to any of our schools in Singapore? He sent them abroad and he sent them to the United World College, What does he know about education in Singapore? He talks as if he knows a great deal about what is going on in the classroom. He casts a slur on our teachers and he sneers at them by saying they are not teaching well, they are not doing a good job in our schools. That is what he is saying.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Member for Anson, as to be expected, wanders over a very wide range of things, mouthing pious platitudes if I may say. And he reveals his ignorance about education and what is going on in our education system. Let me ask him: where did his children go to school? Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“Sir, concerning the Certificate for Special Education, the Member is already saying that it is an inferior certificate or implying that it will be. We say that it is a different certificate from the Certificate of Education. The contents of the course are different. The kind of pupils that the teachers are going to teach are different. There are special needs. Nobody is saying that the Certificate for Special Education is inferior. It is different. Anyway, the details are still being worked out. So let us not pre-judge the issue. As far as the equipment for the School for the Deaf is concerned, as far as I know, we have not received any request for equipment for their vocational centre. They have to their credit raised a lot of money to build that centre and we have not received any request or complaint that the centre is not adequately equipped.”
“As far as teacher training is concerned, many of our teachers who are seconded to these special schools have either received training prior to their posting to the schools or, on joining the schools, they receive additional training, quite often provided by the Association responsible for the school. The course that I mentioned, that the Institute of Education is planning to run at the request of these special schools, is to enable additional training to be provided not only for the teachers sent by the Ministry but also for the teachers whom these school themselves employ. The Associations informed us that many of the teachers that they employ lack training and would benefit from some form of training, and so the Institute of Education is working out with the Associations some form of training which would meet this need. With these remarks, I cannot accept at all the Member's allegation that the Government is doing nothing for the special schools and that we are neglecting them. He has no basis for his remarks.”
“I have said that if more of these schools require premises, we would be more than willing to help them look for such school buildings. In fact, at this very moment the Singapore Association for Retarded Children are getting the Griffiths Primary School from my Ministry to help them in their programme. He talks about taxpayers' money as if children who go to these schools are not enjoying financial support in anyway from the Government. As I said in my reply to the Member for Ayer Rajah, children who go to these schools are subsidized by the Government to the extent of $1,626 per child. This is 41% higher than the subsidy that we spend on children who go to regular schools. 4.45 p.m. Let me come to the heart of the matter which is, should the Government or should not the Government take over these schools? Quite apart from the fact that we are already providing a great deal of support for the running of these schools, I think we recognize that these schools have needs which are specialized, in many ways different from those of normal schools, and that the people in the management committees are able to bring to such schools their personal knowledge and attention which may be lost if these schools become part of a large and, in some ways, bureaucratic educational system. These schools would do better in their present position where they are independent and autonomous, where they can make their own decisions in the best interest of their student that independence and autonomy would be lost and that would be a loss for the schools.”
“Sir, I think it is quite evident from what the Member for Anson has said at great length that he did not listen to my reply to the Question for Oral Answer raised by the Member for Ayer Rajah last week. Short of taking over these special schools, physically and in every other way, the Government is indeed providing as much as it can to help these schools to function and to help their man- agement committees find the means to run these schools, and the Government will continue to do so within constraints, such as the shortage of teachers that we already face in the whole education service. But let me just reiterate for the benefit of the Member for Anson the things that are being done so that he will not feel so emotional in his plea on behalf of these schools which, as I have said, are receiving a great deal of assistance from my Ministry. To start with, we have seconded to these schools a total of 94 teachers. I must add that this is at great cost to the Ministry because we are short of teachers, In the case of the School for the Deaf which has been the main subject of his plea, he is incorrect. He says that my Ministry has seconded 19 teachers. In fact, that School has been receiving 22 teachers for many years. And with the enrolment of 305 students, they have a very favourable pupil-teacher ratio of 14:1. We do not at all begrudge sending teachers to teach the deaf, the blind, the educationally sub-normal, the retarded, because we recognize that. We have not only provided teachers for all these schools but we have also provided physical amenities, including school buildings. Several of the schools are running in buildings which are leased by the Ministry to them at very nominal rates.”
“Sir, I thought I confirmed it in no uncertain terms yesterday. SECURITY GUARDS IN SHOPPING CENTRES (Training) 2. Dr Ang Kok Peng asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether his Ministry has any plan to require security guards in shopping centres to undergo proper training to make them more effective in dealing with shop-lifters and yet responsible enough not to embarrass or mistreat innocent persons during the performance of their duties.”
“Sir, the SAP schools are indeed receiving additional capitation grants to make up for shortfalls arising from higher costs and the lower amount of miscellaneous fees collected by them because of the smaller class sizes. The additional grant is based on the difference between the smaller class size of an SAP school and the standard class size of a regular secondary school. SAP schools are also given special grants to enable them to run their language laboratories and to provide air-conditioning for their library, music and AVA rooms.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1983 to 31st March, 1984 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish the Minister for. Finance is still here because these three items were taken out from the voted funds after a lot of negotiations between my Ministry and the Ministry of Finance. But I hasten to assure the Members for Kampong Ubi and Punggol that these activities will continue but that they will not be funded from voted funds because the Ministry of Finance has decided not to give voted funds for this. It will be funded from school funds and the education fund. So let me say that, first, the three activities will receive maximum support from the financial point of view as well as every other point of view and that there will not be any curtailment of these very important ECA activities which have come to mean a lot to our students and to our teachers. However, the Ministry of Finance has observed that school funds which come from the miscellaneous fees have been accumulating quite substantially in schools, and they feel that since these activities, particularly camping and so on, are school ECA activities, they should be supported by the school funds as the funds are available to them. But nonetheless where a school does not have adequate school funds, the Ministry has the education fund and is prepared to help schools which are in those circumstances. I hope that assures Members that we have - 8.00 p.m.”
“With Confucian Ethics, as Members know, in August/September last year, eight consultants were invited to Singapore to advise the Ministry on how to proceed with this difficult subject. They have since submitted reports to the Ministry giving their views. From the discussions they have had with the local committee that is also responsible for Confucian Ethics materials, a syllabus has now been produced and the synopsis derived from the syllabus is currently in production. The local committee will proceed from there to write the Secondary 3 textbooks in the first instance. The Ministry plans that in 1984 Confucian Ethics should be offered on a pilot basis with a small number of schools to test the suitability of the materials. We do not underestimate at all the difficulty of preparing materials in a form suitable for teaching this subject. As far as we know, nobody has attempted to teach Confucian Ethics as a subject to students of the age group that we are talking about. So the availability of expert advice from these Confucian scholars has proved to be invaluable in guiding the local project team on how to proceed with the development of the syllabus and now of the textbook. Sir, I think I have covered all the points raised by the Member.”
“The Ministry is working very closely with MUIS on this, including lending staff to MUIS for the preparation of these materials. MUIS is also identifying suitable teachers who can be trained to teach IRK when the programme is launched. In the case of Buddhist studies, the material is undergoing some revision because the first draft version has been found to be too difficult, from the language point of view, for the students, So revised materials are being produced by the CDIS working together with the Singapore Buddhist Federation. This is ongoing and the materials for Secondary 3 should be ready during this year for implementation in 1984. Of course, the training of teachers has already been going on for this subject. But they will have to be phased in with the revised materials that are being produced during this year. With Hindu studies and the appointment of a consultant after discussion with the Hindu Advisory Board, the materials are now being produced, again, initially for Secondary 3. And by the middle of this year or so, that material will be ready for Secondary 3 so that training of teachers can commence. With the Study of the World Religions, the syllabus is being looked into at this moment. It is a difficult subject because it covers a fair number of religions, and although books on world religions are available and used elsewhere, we will probably have to adapt these books for our own use. That is only one part of the problem. The other is to find teachers who can teach this range of religions. So this project may not be available in 1984 when we start with the other Religious Knowledge subjects.”
“Sir, first, allow me just to clarify a small point that the Member for Ayer Rajah implied I had said. I have never said that intelligence tests are next to useless. I said they have to be carried out very carefully by experts who know how to set such tests and how to interpret the results of these tests. May I pass on to the comments by the Member for Clementi, before asking my Parliamentary Secretary to reply to the questions raised by the Member for Ayer Rajah concerning the absence of schools in his constituency. I thank the Member for Clementi for giving me this opportunity to inform the House of the present situation regarding the Religious Knowledge projects which are in various stages of pre- paration. He is quite right that, in the case of Bible Knowledge, because it has been a subject offered in a number of mission schools for many years, this subject does not present any problems except perhaps the training of more teachers to teach the subject in those schools which do not presently have Bible Knowledge. The schools that have in the past been offering Bible Knowledge have continued to offer this subject at the 'O' level for their students. But the subject has not been made available to any other schools which have not in the past been offering the subject up till now. Next year, 1984, when we implement all the other Religious Knowledge subjects, Bible Knowledge can also be implemented at the same time in the other schools which do not have it today. 7.45 p.m. As regards Islamic Religious Knowledge, there has been some revision of the syllabus by MUIS, and this is being finalized, and presently MUIS is preparing the materials for the teaching of IRK.”
“The Member mentioned the apparent anomaly of the primary school principal - that he will have the same salary end-point as the classroom teacher, after the latter has gone through many years of service, namely, $3,050. But has the Member not considered the fact that a person who is promoted to the SES as a primary school principal will have gained an advancement in salary of a number of years so that, in monetary terms, while the classroom teacher takes more than 20 years to reach $3,050, the person who is promoted to principal, assuming he started at the same time, is already a number of points ahead and, therefore, deriving the benefits of a higher income by virtue of his promotion to the Senior Education Service. That differential must be borne in mind. He will get there earlier no doubt but he will also have the advantage of having gained a number of years and, therefore, deriving the income from that advantage all along, not to mention that he is also a member of the Senior Education Service and, therefore, gains recognition by being so.”
“The setting up of the Senior Education Service is the first step to achieving this. 7.30 p.m.”
“The problems that he mentioned are not unique to the Senior Education Service. The same problem is faced in every other service, whether it is promotion in the SAF, in the Administrative Service or in any other service. Even in the private sector, there will always be this problem of unhappiness. But the more important point is that deserving officers are recognized. They are interviewed by a fair board and they are accorded promotion so that those who continue in the service can look forward to advancement to higher levels, and that is what this SES exercise hopes to achieve. He said that principals have already been through two exercises; the first to be confirmed as vice-principals and then subsequently to be confirmed as principals and that both these exercises are con- ducted by the PSC as these are promotion grades. He says that principals now have to go through another exercise to go into the Senior Education Service. Let me say that after the principals have got into the Senior Education Service, there are still further promotion steps ahead of them. That is the nature of career advancement; that people have to face promotional exercises from time to time to be considered and to be promoted accordingly. If he implies that there is no need for principals to go through the exercise, then there is no way in which the Senior Education Service can be developed and there is no way in which this career path and scheme of advancement can be created. We have explained before in great detail the reasons for setting up the Senior Education Service so that the whole Education service will have at its pinnacle a core of very experienced and very able officers who can give the whole Education service the professional leadership that it is looking for and that it needs.”
“Sir, the first exercise for the Senior Education Service is on-going at the moment and PSC is interviewing teachers, principals, vice-principals, headquarters officers and heads of departments from junior colleges for emplacement in the Senior Education Service for both graduates and non-graduates. It is too early for me to say what the outcome will be, but it should be known before too long. The Member for Moulmein has really raised a dilemma. We had a mass promotion exercise in 1977. 10,000 teachers took part in that exercise and, of course, as he knows, not everybody could be promoted and only a small number, over 400, were promoted after a very long exercise. Since 1977, there has not been any promotion exercise. The 1977 exercise, although it resulted in the promotion of over 400 officers, also resulted in unhappiness, as to be expected amongst many hundreds who were not promoted. This is the nature of any promotion exercise: that those who are not promoted feel dissatisfied and unhappy. Since then, as I have said, there has not been any promotion exercise and, equally, because there has not been any promotion exercise, many teachers feel unhappy over the fact that there is no promotion exercise. We must accept that every promotion exercise results in some people who will be promoted and some others will not be promoted and, in the nature of every promotion exercise, it is the minority who will be promoted. If, as the Member suggests, promotion exercises lead to unhappiness, the alternative is to have no promotion exercise which also results in unhappiness. We have to face this and teachers, principals and vice-principals are generally realistic and are prepared to face this fact before going to an interview board for promotion.”
“Sir, I share the concern of the Member for Pasir Panjang that physical education could be and should be better taught to our students, especially to boys in the secondary schools. This is a subject which has engaged the Ministry's attention for some time. I mentioned in answer to a question sometime last year in this House that we had conducted a feasibility study and were at that time waiting for an expert to come from another country to review the feasibility study and to advise us where to go next. I am pleased to inform the Member for Pasir Panjang that the expert has reviewed our plans and has recommended strongly that a PE College be set up. The final decision is about to be taken and, barring any unforeseen circumstances, the plans should proceed with the setting up of a PE College which will train GCE 'A' level holders for the Diploma for Physical Education. The initial intake will be modest, of about 50 persons, and we hope that the first intake can take place in June 1984.”
“But where a school has been located near a major road, the architects generally locate the school as far back as possible, leaving enough space for a playing field between the school and the road. In some cases noise reduction measures, such as earth bunds, trees and so on, are introduced to minimize the problem. I can assure him that this is a matter which is of concern to the Ministry whenever new schools are being planned and built. His point regarding the pupil whose mother is a Singapore citizen and who is divorced, I suggest he brings this matter up with me and I would certainly look into it on his behalf. His final point about teachers, we will take note of it. It is very desirable that teachers' relationship with their pupils should be good and one that sets a good example, but I think we have to allow for human limitations and failings from time to time.”
“I do not propose to give him the details now but rather wait until the report that has been called for by him is ready because these are details which should be properly presented in the total context of what has taken place in our educational system. The Member for Kampong Kembangan raised several issues. I think I have answered him concerning the special course and why the change has taken place. He also asked about part-time courses for Singaporeans to do further education. I am pleased to inform him that, in fact, at the diploma level at the two Polytechnics, this has been going on and the enrolment has been steadily going up. So the opportunity for working people who want to get back into a technical course to improve themselves is there and is being offered by the Polytechnics. At the lower level, the VITB offers numerous courses, of all kinds, including courses leading to 'O' level and 'A' level, which the Member for Moulmein talked about earlier, an opportunity for people to take their 'O' level or 'A' level again. These courses are there and thousands register each year in these part-time courses run by the VITB leading to 'O' and 'A' levels and also to technical qualifications. I take note of what the Member for Kampong Kembangan has said about noise level. I will certainly feed this back to the PWD who are responsible for the design of the schools. We are aware of this problem and as far as possible, we want to locate schools to minimize the noise problem. But this is not possible in every case because the sites for some of these schools have been chosen and reserved many years ago and roads have been built after the sites have been chosen. It may be possible in some cases to change sites but in other cases it may not be possible.”
“They have undergone changes themselves, reflecting the demands of parents for the streams so that, far from the danger that many of the Chinese primary schools will close down, many of them in fact have changed into integrated schools and have continued to take in students into both streams and more and more into the EL stream. So what we are observing is a transition. Many of the good Chinese primary schools are being preserved by the very fact that they are changing in their course structure. 7.00 p.m. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] The question is whether the pre-primary policy, which was enunciated in 1979 whereby students must go on from Primary 1, 2 to 3 in CL stream because they had gone into schools which were considered to be Chinese primary schools, should remain irrespective of these changes that are taking place. If we continue with that policy, I think we will see a decline in the enrolment into the pre-primary course because parents want their children to go into the EL stream at Primary 1 rather than wait till Primary 4. Of course, changes in the SAP course as well as in the pre-primary that I have described and have been expressed by the Member for Leng Kee have wider implications such as cultural heritage and so on. I do not think this is the moment to discuss or to speculate on these wider implications. At the heart of it, however, we must recognize parental choices, parental wishes are involved and we must be prepared to meet these parental wishes as far as we can. The Member for Rochore raised several questions.”
“But over and above this, the pre-primary programme has been in operation since 1979 and the first batch that reached Primary 3, namely, the batch of 1979, passed the Primary 3 last year. As you know, in the pre-primary programme it was stated right from the beginning that after Primary 3 parents would have the choice of opting whether their children should go on to the Chinese stream or English stream. In that first batch, after Primary 3, 77% opted to go to the English stream. These are clear indications by parents of what they perceive to be the right choice and decision for their children, and we must take serious note of such desires. It is with this feedback, as well as the fact that the pre-primary intake itself from 1979 to 1983 has also been on the decline, that the recent offer of the option for registration in Primary 1 was made. Between 1979 and 1983 after an initial interest in the pre-primary course, the intake had dropped by 25%. I think we cannot ignore these trends and hold firm to a position irrespective of what are the real wishes of parents for their children. So this year, the pre-primary batch going into Primary 1 were given the option to choose either the EL stream or CL stream in the same schools. The result is that many of them, in fact, a high percentage or over 80%, chose to go to the EL stream and in the same schools that they have registered under. I think we must recognize that, over the intervening four years, the Chinese primary schools themselves have undergone a change in those four years. Many of them have become dual stream schools. Some of them have become wholly EL stream schools.”
“Whether any more can be done to encourage students to join the Special course in spite of what has already been done is another matter. But this year, as we all know, the results of the first batch who took the 'O' level have been very good. They have done as well if not slightly better than the same top 10% who were in the non-SAP schools. This, I think, should give confidence to more parents that it is possible for the ablest students to do the Special course and to do well. The results have been widely publicized. We will, of course, be monitoring the intake for next year to see if this has registered with parents when they make a choice for the enrolment of their children. The Member raised the point that some administrative problems may have been one cause for parents hesitating to enrol their children in the SAP schools, namely, in order to achieve a better spread of students among the nine SAP schools, parents have not been given the school of their choice. This is not so. In fact, they have been given a choice. But, of course, failing to get the first choice, alternatives have to be offered within the SAP schools. Nevertheless, the administrative aspects are noted, and where they can be improved upon, we shall certainly do so - to make it less deterrent, or more convenient, for parents to register their children for the SAP schools. As regards pre-primary schools, he asked why did the Ministry carry out a survey last year to find out the desires of parents for their children, whether they want them to go on to the English stream or the Chinese stream in primary school. As a result of a lot of demand by parents for this option, the Ministry felt that a survey should be carried out to see what the demand is of parents whose children are in pre-primary schools.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the point that a report should be made to Parliament regarding the progress of the new education system, which has been mentioned by the Member for Rochore as well as the Member for Moulmein, I have already said that we will certainly look into this. Obviously from the points that have been raised, there is much that need to be made better known to Members of the House and to the public. So this is a matter that we will look into. The Member for Leng Kee touched on two topics, namely, the SAP schools and the pre-primary schools. He asked in his speech on the SAP schools what can be done to attract more students to join the Special course, namely, the CL1 and EL1 course. I think Members of the House know that a great deal of effort, in fact, has been done by the Ministry in this respect. For example, the SAP schools enjoy a much better pupil-teacher ratio which is known to the parents and to the students. As many as 50% of their teachers are graduates compared with a lower percentage in the non-SAP schools. They have facilities for language learning and so on. So the special programme in the SAP schools enjoys a large measure of support, recognizing that it is difficult even for able students to deal with EL1 and CL1 at that level. Notwithstanding that, as I said earlier, in my oral reply, there is a downward trend in the enrolment or intake into the SAP schools, steadily over the past five years including this year. The Member for Leng Kee has very clearly stated the reasons why some of the parents are not sending their children to do the Special course. I agree with him. I think he has made a very clear analysis of the reasons.”
“The purpose of the policy in those days was precisely to emphasize the importance of language and the importance of bilingualism. This is the policy which we have retained up to now, but we should now examine it in the light of the new education system and, if necessary, make changes. But we should not rush into this and make changes simply because some students find it difficult to do the second language and therefore feel that the change is for the better. We should be very careful about making changes of this kind. He also touched on the question of IQ test, whether these tests should be used for the purpose of streaming. Let me say that IQ tests are a class of tests that require a great deal of expertise, first, in devising these tests and, secondly, in interpreting the results of such tests. Let me give an account from other educational systems, for example, in the UK when they had the 11-plus examinations. At one time IQ tests were incorporated into the 11-plus examinations. The results of those tests had errors. Pupils were being wrongly streamed by the predictions of those tests. So we should be very careful when we look at this whole subject of IQ tests. First, whether we have the expertise to handle them and, secondly, what is the experience of other people in the use of such tests.”
“Perhaps it is better for him to leave school with a CSE, one subject or two subjects, and go into skills training, vocational training, or develop some marketable skills so that he can go on into the world of work. But the Member seems to think that if the student fails his CSE, we should still let him have a chance to do his 'O' level, knowing that the results are predictable. I think the stand that the Ministry has taken, which is derived from the policy of 1979, is a realistic one. He says one more year in school means these students are less likely to become drug addicts and secret society gangsters and so on. Let me just say that the old system which we had where pupils leave school at Secondary 1 and Secondary 2 creates a much greater chance of more students going astray into drug addiction or crimes and so on because they are no longer in school. This has been the case. The system which we now have where the pupil would remain in school for a longer period of time reduces this chance. Surely this is a more humane system than the one that he advocates we should return to. Let me deal with the two points raised by the Member for Ayer Rajah, which I apologize for having overlooked. The first point he raised is that of double weightage for the first and second language at PSLE. He asked whether this has any adverse effect on streaming, distorting the pattern of streaming of students going into Normal or the Express stream. Let me say that this very subject is under very close scrutiny and study at the moment because there are borderline cases who will be affected by this. The double weightage policy itself has a long history. In the case of the first language, it dates back to 1963, and double weightage for the second language dates back to 1973.”
“Sir, I feel I must correct any misimpression that the Member for Moulmein may leave with the Members of the House or with the public at large. He is championing a situation where as many of our students as possible should be given the chance to do the 'O' Levels because he says that this was the system that we have had and it is that very system which had resulted in 28% who do not even reach Secondary 4. He says that CSE is another examination and therefore it is an obstacle. Every year there is an examination in school at every level. And in the old system where they were all rushing through four years, every year students who failed were retained; those who were over-aged left school. In the Normal course the syllabus has been reduced for each of the years; and the passing criterion, which is what the Member for Ayer Rajah alluded to, has been reduced to a pass in L1 and any two other subjects so that a student in the Normal course can proceed from one year to the next. That is as low as we can reduce the passing criterion. I am sure the Member for Moulmein will agree with me that the new system is a far more humane one, making it possible for more students to remain in school to receive as much education as they can before they finally have to leave at CSE or for some at 'O' level. He is saying that CSE is preventing students from getting to do 'O' level. CSE is an examination, in this case a public examination but not unlike a school examination. If a student reaches CSE and does badly in his CSE, is the Member suggesting that we should still give him the chance to go on to Secondary 5 to do his 'O' level despite the fact he has done very badly at CSE?”
“I want to clarify this point which the Member for Moulmein has been stressing. Those who are going on to 'O' level via the normal route and who in the past have reached 'O' level, will continue to do so under the new system. There is no reason why the CSE should be a barrier because they should pass the CSE. The Member should be aware of the 28% who number about 10,000 who drop out from school, for whom CSE is a reasonable and attainable goal. If the Member says that every child in Singapore should have the chance to reach 'O' level, he might be misleading the public because this has never been the case. And if the Member conveys this view to the public - that every child in Singapore can and should reach 'O' level - I think this would lead the public into an unrealistic expectation, because no educational system as far as I know has been able to remotely achieve that. So let us see the CSE in its proper light. First, the CSE is to cater for those who would otherwise drop out from school, and they are not a small number, not a few dropping out each year. It is 10,000 or so. And, at the same time, the CSE allows those who have the ability to get to 'O' level to do so, and this is provided for in the Normal course where they take five years instead of four. This is the message we want to assure parents of, but not to raise the impossible expectation that every child should have the right to reach 'O' level and so on, because this is unattainable. No system, as far as I know, has been able to achieve that. As Members here, we ought to look at the system and the capabilities of students going through school as realistically as possible.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to make a clarification.”
“The selection of teachers is by districts or zones so that there is a wide cross-section of teachers from primary and secondary schools and junior colleges.”
“It has provided a forum where many professional matters concerning curriculum, teaching problems, methodology and so on can be discussed openly and frankly with school heads. The school principals have organized themselves into Zone councils so that Schools Council papers can be discussed at the Zone level before they are discussed at the Schools Council. These Zone councils have been an effective forum for other heads of schools and principals who are not members of the Schools Council to thrash matters out so that their members, who are on the Schools Council, can bring forward their suggestions and ideas. This is one measure that has been taken to further involve school principals in the matters that are being discussed at the Schools Council. Secondly, the Member for Nee Soon is quite right in saying that many principals come to observe the proceedings of the Schools Council on closed-circuit television. The number varies but an intercom is available between those in the observer room and where the Council meets, so that members who are in the observer room not only observe what is going on but can raise questions and contribute points through the intercom. This is used at every Council meeting, and I think it has improved communication. Of more importance is the fact that the school principals themselves and groups of principals in neighbouring schools have been coming forward to present reports and memoranda for discussion in the Schools Council. So it is not just the Ministry providing materials for discussion but also vice versa. As for the appointment of members of the Schools Council, a third of the members are retired each year and new members are appointed.”
“One is concerned with the homework and the workload of the students as a result of the full-day programme, and the second looked at other qualitative factors, such as the problem of meals and lunch and the problem of counselling by teachers, whether there is better rapport between the teachers and the students and so on. A third study is, in fact, under way to see if there are any educational advantages gained by these pilot schools as a result of the full-day programme. Until that study is completed, I think it is premature for us to say whether or not we should go ahead with the full-day school programme. But the Ministry is aware that apart from the implementation problems of the kind mentioned by the Member for Nee Soon, there are some other more fundamental problems, the foremost of which is the need to build a large number of schools if we go full-day and, therefore, the need to use up a lot of land. 5.15 p.m. The second point he made concerns the computer clubs. In the Oral Answer this afternoon, I have already elaborated on the points concerning the computer clubs. But I would like to inform him that presently a survey is being carried out on all these computer appreciation clubs to see how well these expensive items are being used and whether the students are gaining the benefits we expect from the clubs. Until that survey is completed, we are not ready yet to say whether we will further extend the clubs and to provide more micro-computers. He also raised the question about the Schools Council and asked whether the Schools Council was fulfilling its purpose. Let me say that the Schools Council is fulfilling its purpose, providing a two-way channel of communication between the Ministry and its officers and school principals.”
“In these reports, detailed reports on the streaming in the primary schools, secondary schools, the implementation of the monolingual course and so on are available. They run into many pages. At the Schools Council itself, many reports are tabled and reported widely. From the point of view of reporting on what the Ministry is doing, what progress the educational system has made, I think a great deal of information is available. But I take note of the request by hon. Members that, at some stage, the Ministry of Education should compile a comprehensive report on the implementation and progress of the new education system. We must bear in mind that at present the system has not been implemented a full cycle yet, meaning that the monolingual students are still in the schools. They will not complete and leave the schools until 1985. The CSE examination has not yet been set. It will only take place at the end of next year. These matters are still in the implementation stage, and the system has not yet completed a full cycle. It might be appropriate after that cycle is completed for a more comprehensive report to be made. But, as I have said, the request by Members of the House is noted. The Member for Nee Soon has brought up three topics. The first is the full-day school. He asked about the full-day school and whether the implementation problems that he has heard of are being studied by the Ministry, and what would be the final outcome of the pilot schools that are trying out the full-day programme. To date, two studies have been carried out by the Ministry on the full-day school.”
“As we are asking a larger and larger proportion of the cohort to get three 'O'level passes, we are running into difficulties which become insurmountable for the students concerned. From that point of view, if the students are able to achieve a pass at CSE and leave the school system to go on to vocational skills training and so on, it is by far a better alternative than to struggle with only the 'O' level in sight and to perhaps pass one 'O' level or none at all. Next, let me deal with the point raised by the Member for Moulmein that the new education system should be reviewed and reported to Parliament three years after the Goh Report was adopted by Parliament in 1979. On this point, first of all, my Minister would like to remind the House that in 1981 in the Addendum to the President's Address, a very full report was, in fact, presented to Parliament. It contained 19 pages. It reviewed what had been achieved up to that point of time and it also projected some new matters that were going to be implemented. This is not to say that the Ministry of Education is reluctant to report on the progress that is being made in the implementation of the Goh Keng Swee Report. In fact, as Members know, many reports are made public concerning what is going on in the Ministry. For example, three catalogues comprising 1,077 MCM papers have been published covering the years 1980, 1981 and 1982. These three catalogues are available to Members of the House as well as to bodies outside. They can request for any of the reports contained therein. I note that some Members of the House have indeed availed themselves of these reports, 10 Members to be precise.”
“On the other hand, if we were to raise the level of CSE, as has been suggested why not make it 70%, so that those who are doing the CSE will complete 70% instead of 50% or 60% of their 'O' level so that when they go into the fifth year they will have less to do and therefore have a better chance of going through the 'O' level - there is also a negative consequence in that more students are not going to make it to the CSE, especially those at the lower end of the group. There are going to be more failures at CSE. Therefore, while you are helping one group at the top end of the Normal Stream, you are also doing a great dis service to those at the lower end of the Normal stream. There has to be a middle course. Let me just say that there has been no change in the policy concerning the Normal course. If Members read the recommendations very carefully, the one quoted by the Member for Moulmein, it says here, "The CSE is to provide students who could not succeed at the GCE 'O' level with a lower qualification." It goes on in the second part to say, "Pupils may take the GCE 'O' level examination in the fifth year, sitting for the same subjects for which they have performed well at the CSE examination." So the CSE is really trying to cater for two groups of students. The second point that is worth making concerning the 'O' level is this.Of course, it is every parent's aspiration that his children should make it to the 'O' level and to get as many 'O' level passes as possible. This is the ideal. This is what drives many parents and children to work hard. But, at the same time, we must see the 'O' level in a realistic light. It is a very academic course. In the UK 25% of the students get three 'O' level passes. We are achieving more than that.”
“There is no bar. The only bar is their own achievement. How far can they go? How much can they do? I hope this point clears any doubts that may have arisen even from the remarks made today regarding the purpose of the Normal course. I want to assure Members of the House that there has been no change in the purpose of the Normal course, that it is still intended to enable the slower students, i.e; those who were able to make it to one 'O' level, to make it to two 'O' levels and, at the same time, to help those who were dropping out to stay on to get the CSE. As for the standard of the CSE examination which was raised by the Member for Ayer Rajah, he said that the CSE was pitched at 50% or 60% of the 'O' level. Secondary 3, which is the year before 'O' level for the Express course, is pitched at 50% of the 'O' level. A student who finishes Secondary 3 would have, roughly speaking, finished half of what he has to complete for the 'O' level, so that when he goes on to Secondary 4, in the Express course, he will complete the rest of it and sit for his 'O' level. So for a student to complete 50% or 60% of his course or his syllabus at CSE and to spend one more year to complete the balance for his 'O' level is not unreasonable. All teachers will be able to tell you that to pass the 'O' level examination, it is not crucial that the student must complete 100% of the syllabus because nobody actually does that. The students complete as much of the syllabus as they can and are still able to pass the examination. What I am saying is that one more year for those from the Normal course-who are going to take the 'O' level should be adequate for them to prepare for that 'O' level examination.”
“These are the group of students who, given enough time, will get two 'O' level passes and may even achieve three 'O' level passes. That group is within the 72% that I spoke of. But the second group that the Normal course must cater for are the 28% who have dropped out in the past. These students must have a goal which is attainable. If that goal is raised to a level which is beyond their reach, such as the 'O' level, they will never make it because in the past they have not made it. This goal which we have set for the Normal course is achievable, hopefully, by a large proportion of this 28% who would otherwise drop out, i.e., the CSE. So the Normal course is designed for these two different groups of students progressing at their own pace and, after four years, sit for the CSE examination. With the first group that has the potential to go on to the 'O' level, there is no doubt that they will do well at the CSE examination achieving three or more CSE subjects and many of them will have achieved sufficiently to go on to the fifth year to do their 'O' level. Since they have an extra year, they are likely to do better than just one 'O' level, which is what students like them are achieving today. On the other hand, the group who were premature school leavers would get hopefully one, if not more, CSE subjects. They would have had four years of secondary education compared to one or two years of secondary education today. For this group of students, it is reasonable for them to expect the CSE to be a terminal examination for them. They will leave school with a certificate. They would have received more education than they would otherwise have got. Even then the door is not barred because some of them undoubtedly will do well enough at CSE to go on to 'O' level.”
“Sir, I would first like to thank the three speakers for the important points they have made concerning several topics thus giving me an opportunity to answer them. Let me deal first with the question of the CSE and the Normal course, a subject which has been dealt with by the Member for Moulmein and the Member for Ayer Rajah. They quoted this year's examination results which show that 99% of our students achieved one 'O' level pass which indeed is true. But that is only half the story because they may not be aware of the fact that the students who sat for the 'O' level examination last year represented only 72% of the students starting off at Secondary 1 four years ago. In other words, 28% had already disappeared from the scene and never even reached a level to attempt the GCE 'O' level examination. This 28% of the students dropped out at Secondary 1, 2 and 3, and some even at Secondary 4. So when we say that 99% of the students at GCE 'O' level managed to get at least one 'O' level pass, we are talking of what was left of the Secondary 1 cohort, after attrition, who finally arrived to sit for the GCE 'O' level examination. What about the 28% that were missing? We should see the Normal course and the CSE in its total light, and not deal only with those students that make it to the GCE 'O' level, namely, the 72%, but 100% of the students who join Secondary 1, and see how we can help as many of them as possible to get through secondary education and get as much education as they can before they leave school. So the Normal Course must take into account two different groups of students. 5.00 p.m. First, the group of students who, the two Members have rightly pointed out, can make it to one or perhaps two 'O' level passes.”
“Sir, to date, 438 teachers have been trained to supervise Computer Appreciation Clubs in secondary schools. Another 137 teachers are currently under-going training. They will complete their training in May 1983. A further group of 80 teachers is targetted to undergo training in July 1983. By the end of 1983, it is estimated that 655 teachers would have been trained. About 8,000 students are members of these Computer Appreciation Clubs. It is expected that the total membership of the clubs will increase to 13,000 by the end of 1983. The average computer time available for each student member is about half an hour a week. 334 micro-computers have been distributed to 131 secondary schools. 82 schools have been provided with three micro-computer systems each. The rest have between one and two systems each. The Ministry is looking into the possibility of providing more micro-computers for schools. MR PHEY YEW KOK (Efforts to locate) 6. Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether any further progress has been made by the Police to locate the former President of the National Trades Union Congress and People's Action Party Member of Parliament Mr Phey Yew Kok and what steps, if any, have been taken since his last reply in this House.”
“Sir, it is well known that for many years now since the 1950s parents in Singapore have been sending their children, in increasing numbers, to the English stream. In the 1970s the number of pupils sent by parents to the Chinese stream continued to fall. What we have observed of parents wanting to send their children to the non-SAP schools instead of the SAP stream is part of the same trend. The reason is simply an economic and a rational one because most parents recognize the importance of English as the working language in Singapore by virtue of our peculiar position in the world economy. COMPUTER APPRECIATION CLUBS (Training of Teachers) 5. Mr Lim Boon Heng asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education how many teachers have been trained to supervise computer appreciation clubs in secondary schools; how many students are members of such clubs; how much computer time is available to each student member per week; and whether his Ministry plans to provide schools with more micro-computers.”
“They demonstrate that it is possible for very able students to take EL1 and CL1 and do as well as those among the same top 10% in the non-SAP stream. However, recognizing that the intake into the SAP schools is likely to decline because of the large decrease in CL stream primary enrolment, the Ministry is proposing to allow students from the top 10% at PSLE to join the Express course in the SAP schools to do EL1 and CL2. This will attract some of the better pupils from the EL primary schools to join the SAP schools, since they will not be deterred by having to do EL1 and CL1. Of course, those who want to opt to do the Special course, i.e. EL1 and CL1, can continue to do so. This measure will enlarge the intake of able students into the SAP schools. The ability of the SAP schools to maintain the Special course will depend on the demand for the course. If the intake continues to decline in some of the SAP schools, it may be necessary to transfer their Special course to the more viable SAP schools: These schools will then revert to regular schools offering Express and Normal courses. Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi (Kampong Kembangan): Sir, what are the reasons for the preference of parents to send their children to the EL schools and not to the SAP schools?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the future of the Special course will depend on the ability of the SAP schools to attract enough students from the top 10% to do the course. Up to now, these students have come from both the Chinese and English primary streams. In 1979, when the SAP school programme was started, the total enrolment consisted of 65% from the CL (Chinese language) stream and 35% from the EL (English language) stream. This year, the ratio was 40% from the CL stream and 60% from the EL stream. The overall intake had also fallen from 1,455 in 1979, representing 48.5% of those from the top 10%, to 1,255 or 38.8% for 1983. The intake from the CL stream will fall drastically in the future as enrolment in the primary CL stream continues to decline. his year, only 2% of the Primary 1 intake as for the CL stream. The overall intake into the SAP schools is, therefore, likely to decline unless more able pupils from the EL stream can be induced to join the SAP schools. It would be Singapore's loss if some of our best Chinese secondary schools should decline to become mediocre schools because good students are going to the EL schools instead of the SAP schools. Apart from their high academic standards, these schools possess an ethos which has over the years produced students with a strong sense of discipline and seriousness of purpose. This quality of the best Chinese schools is linked to the quality of their principals and teaching staff. For these schools to survive, they must continue to attract able students not only to the Special course but also to their Express course. The results of the first batch of Special course students to take their 'O' level are very good.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in 1982, the total number of pupils who left primary school pre-maturely was 2,755. This amounted to 0.94% of the total primary school enrolment which was 291,686. The majority of these pupils (about 66%) were from Primary 6, Primary 7 Extended Course and the Basic 4 Course. For comparison, in 1978, the year before primary school streaming was introduced, the total number of premature primary school leavers was 8,900 or 3% of the total enrolment of 296,922. The introduction of streaming has, therefore, reduced the number of premature primary school leavers by more than three-fold. In 1982, secondary streaming had reached only Secondary 2 level. The total number of premature school leavers from Secondary 1 and 2 were 1,605 or 1.9% of the total enrolment for the two levels. In contrast, for the same two levels in 1978, the total number of premature school leavers were 8,007 or 9.3% of the total enrolment. The reduction in dropout rate between the two years is nearly five-fold. In absolute terms, the difference between 1978 and 1982 was a saving of over 12,500 pupils from becoming drop-outs. SPECIAL ASSISTANCE PLAN SCHOOLS 4. Mr Liew Kok Pun asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education what is the future development of the Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools.”
“Sir, the five aided-schools are: St Thomas Secondary School, Fairfield Methodist Secondary School, Fairfield Methodist Primary School, Nan Hwa Girls' High School and Presbyterian High School. PREMATURE SCHOOL LEAVERS 3. Mr Liew Kok Pun asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education what are the number and percentage of premature school-leavers for each level from Primary 1 to Secondary 4 in 1982, and whether streaming has reduced the number of premature school-leavers in that year.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Chairman of the Association for the Deaf is entitled to his views. As far as providing trained teachers to help in the School for the Deaf, we are indeed providing teachers for the School for the Deaf. SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FUND (Particulars) 3. Dr Toh Chin Chye asked the Minister for Finance, up to 31st December, 1982, (a) how much was collected for the Skills Development Fund; and (b) how much has been disbursed for the purpose of the fund and to which organizations and companies.”
“Sir, at present the Government has no intention of taking over the special schools. The reason is as follows. Special schools are run by voluntary groups comprising interested and dedicated persons. These schools have special and unique needs, including counselling needs, which the Member described just now. These special needs are quite different, in the curriculum, and in the kind of attention they need, from our regular normal schools. Their management committees are able to look into these needs and provide personal attention in a way which no administrators in a bureaucracy can really do. Therefore, instead of taking them over, we believe that it is in the best interest of the special schools to be independent and autonomous. The Ministry on the other hand can and will continue to provide them with financial support and manpower, wherever possible.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we have over the years supported on a case-by-case basis teachers who have done various types of courses to the PSC for consideration. Some of these cases have been accepted by the PSC and others have been rejected. As I said, the prerogative thus rests with them. But on our part we do support cases and these matters have been raised in this House before. SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FUND (Particulars) 4. Mr S. Chandra Das asked the Minister for Finance (i) how may applications have been received for grants from the Skills Development Fund and how many have been successful; (ii) how many workers have benefitted from these grants; and (iii) what is the breakdown of the categories of workers that have been upgraded.”
“Sir, where it is appropriate and where it leads to qualifications that can be accepted by the PSC, in principle, it is yes.”
“Sir, there is indeed a call by the Government to members of the public to upgrade themselves through various means. But I think we should, in the case of the Education Service, consider this in the light of whether the upgrading is relevant and appropriate. A part-time external degree, for example, is appropriate for many fields of employment. But in the case of the Education Service, as I have explained, which requires that every graduate should have majored in at least two teaching subjects, it is not an appropriate degree.”