Cabinet B- Education in Singapore Enabling Students To Have An Equal Chance At Succeeding Improving Pre-School Education
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Cabinet B- Education in Singapore
Enabling Students To Have An
Equal Chance At Succeeding
Improving Pre-School Education
1
Table Of Contents
ENSURING EQUALITY IN EDUCATION 4
Historical Overview 4
Current situation 7
Previous Solutions 8
Challenges 10
Social Equity Gap 10
Stigmatisation 13
Projecting into the Future 14
Conclusion 16
Questions for Discussion 17
Bibliography 18
IMPROVING PRESCHOOL EDUCATION 23
Background Information 24
Premium 24
Anchor Operators 25
Partner Operators 25
Development of Preschool Education in Singapore 26
The Birth of PAP Kindergartens 26
PCF Kindergartens 26
Nurturing Early Learners Framework 27
Early Childhood Development Agency 27
The Birth of MOE Kindergartens 27
Early Childhood Development Centres Act 2017 28
National Institute of Early Childhood Development 29
Heightened Support for Preschool Education 29
Current challenges 30
Providing the capacity to accommodate diverse needs 31
Resource constraints 31
Standardisation vs. Flexibility 32
2Conclusion 33
Questions for Discussion 34
Bibliography 35
3ENSURING EQUALITY IN EDUCATION
Singapore has long prided itself on meritocracy. This belief that the brightest perform the best
permeates into our world-class education system as well, one that constantly places at the top in
overall PISA scores (The Economist, 2018). Singapore's Ministry of Education (MOE) has
expressed commitment in ensuring all students get equal opportunities to succeed in the system,
from the very start of students’ education journey in kindergarten (MOE, 2017). However, a
growing class divide has raised questions on whether all Singaporeans have equal chances to
succeed in the current system (Channel NewsAsia (CNA), 2019). Much like the Matthew Principle
where the haves will have even more and the have-nots will have even less, the affluent appear
to be increasingly going to more ‘elite’ schools, while the less affluent go to so-called regular
‘neighbourhood’ schools, fostering a sense of elitism (CNA, 2019).
Historical Overview
Singapore’s education system has evolved greatly over the decades under MOE's guidance.
From the industralisation-era machine focused on readying the masses for workforce recruitment,
to the current learner-centred model centred on inclusivity and individual progression, the
education system is constantly adapting based on the nation’s needs.
It largely seems that the system has been consistently successful, as reflected in metrics such as
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Programme for
4International Student Assessment (PISA), or the many editorials written about how to emulate the
system.
The table below roughly outlines the history of Singapore’s education system from the 1960s to
the present day (2020).
Survival-driven Phase (1960s-1970s)
1960 Introduction of Primary School Leaving Examination (NLB, 2015)
1969 Junior college stream created (NLB, 2014)
Efficiency-driven Phase (1970s-1980s)
1979 Special Assistance Plan created (Ho, 2016)
Ability-driven Phase (1980s-1990s)
1980 New Education System created (ST, 2016)
1982 Last vernacular schools close
1984 Gifted Education Programme created (Loo, 2016)
Laselle School of the Arts founded
1987 SAP schools use English as a first language
Independent schools formed (The Straits Times, 2016)
Centralised Institutes formed (Outram Institute, 1989)
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation (1990s-2000s)
51992 Joint Polytechnic Admissions Exercise introduced (JPAE, n.d.)
Institute of Technical Education founded (Kow, 2011)
1993 Edusave system created (MOE, 2007)
1994 Normal Technical stream created (MOE, 2007)
Teach Less, Learn More (2000s-2010s)
2004 Direct School Admission programme created (CNA, 2018)
EM1 and EM2 streams merged
Singapore Sports School opened
2008 EM 3 stream scrapped
IP Programme created
School of the Arts created
Primary school subject-based banding started
Every School a Good School (2010s-Present)
2012 MOE stops banding secondary schools (ST, 2016)
MOE stops releasing information on PSLE top scorers (ST, 2016)
2014 Secondary school subject-based banding started (Teng, 2019)
2016 Early Admissions Exercise introduced (MOE, 2016)
2019 PSLE to be reformed using AL system by 2021 (ST, 2016)
One Secondary Education, Many Subject Bands (Proposed 2020s) (MOE, 2019)
62020 MOE plans to remove secondary school streaming by 2024 and stop O’ and N’
Level examinations by 2027 (ST, 2016)
Current situation
The results of Singapore’s education system appear to speak for themselves, with Singapore
ranking at the top internationally for 3 consecutive PISA rankings (which take into account Math,
Reading and Science), until the most recent ranking from 2018 (although it still placed second).
Other indicators of its international competitiveness includes winning all but one edition of the
Angus Ross Prize for top ‘A’ level English Literature students outside the UK (Yang, 2017); as
well as overperforming in its IB results by containing over half of the global cohort’s perfect scorers
in 2020, alongside a 96.66% pass rate and an average score of 37.99 against the global average
of 28.52 (Ang, 2020).
Yet, there are signs that not everyone is given the same chance to perform at a similar level. For
instance, OECD’s PISA data indicates that Singaporean students from poorer social backgrounds
underperform by a greater degree when compared to their equivalents in other countries, which
hints that social class is a relatively greater obstacle locally (OECD, 2019). In Raffles Institution,
often considered Singapore’s top school, only 53% of its 2018 student cohort lived in public
housing (Ng & Toh, 2018), compared to the national average of 81% during the same year
(Data.gov.sg, 2019). While the PISA data does also suggest that Singaporean students have a
tendency to overperform their predicted performance based on social background (Teng, 2017),
7a clear gap still seems to exist hindering poorer students’ ability to gain access to the top
educational institutions, and hence further their prospects even more. Students who venture
outside the standard 6-4-2 system which has been in place since 1961 (MOE, 2007) - 6 years in
primary schools, 4 in secondary schools and 2 in tertiary institutions - may find themselves judged
or stigmatised.
Previous Solutions
MOE has implemented various strategies in an attempt to ensure every student has the
opportunity to play to their academic strengths and maximise their potential. These include (i)
curriculum standardisation, (ii) subject-based banding, (iii) specialised programmes to meet
specific learner needs and (iv) social and financial support programmes for the underprivileged.
For instance, all students are currently instructed a standardised curriculum with English as the
primary language of instruction. This was in contrast to vernacular schools of the past, which
divided students along racial lines and caused issues such as ineffective bilingualism and poor
literacy (ST, 2016). Streaming, which was intended to let students pursue their education at a
pace aligned with their perceived aptitude, has also been eliminated at the primary school level
in lieu of ‘subject-based banding’ that allows more flexibility for students in extending their
potential for subjects they are strong in, while working to improve their grasp on subjects where
they needed more assistance (MOE, n.d.). This move also came after parents were concerned
with the labels put on children for entering ‘slower’ streams (especially based on their aptitude at
the age of 9), and how that would affect their psychology. Secondary schools will also move
towards a similar system from 2020 onwards.
8Additionally, MOE has introduced a wide range of programmes over the decades to meet both
diverse learners’ needs, as well as the demands of an increasingly globalised and modern society.
The Gifted Education Programme (GEP) was created in 1984 for students who excelled
academically. This special programme was meant to cultivate critical thinking (NLB, 2014). At the
secondary school level, this was officially replaced by the Integrated Programme was later created
in 2008 (Chang, 2014), allowing academically stronger students to enter a 6-year course at the
secondary level, culminating with tertiary credentials (MOE, n.d.). Through bypassing the ‘O’
Levels, students had more time to pursue a more holistic and comprehensive educational
experience, particularly non-academic competencies, and might even pursue qualifications such
as the IB, which allows student to pursue a more flexible course of personal development, and
also covers social and emotional growth (IB, n.d.).
Over the past 2 decades, secondary schools dedicated to specific learners’ needs have also been
set up. For instance, Specialised Schools for students who learn better under a more technical
and practical-oriented curriculum also have higher levels of resources dedicated to supporting
special needs students (Teng, 2018). Other specialised independent institutes include the NUS
High School of Mathematics and Science, the School of Science and Technology, the School of
the Arts and the Singapore Sports School, all of which have programmes tailored specifically to
their niche student intake. A similar diversity is reflected at the post-secondary level, which
includes polytechnics, junior colleges, centralised institutes and ITE.
Last but certainly not least, an array of financial programmes is in place to ensure that every
Singaporean child has the means to afford attending school. All Singaporeans are entitled to
about $11,000 of subsidies in primary and secondary school, regardless of their family's financial
background (Ministry of Finance, n.d), as well as subsidy schemes accessible through schools,
9government networks and even interfaith organisations, and the Edusave scheme founded in
1993 where students will receive annual government top-ups for special programmes. The most
prominent of this is the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS), which covers students from low-
income backgrounds in all government aided and specialised institutes, while independent
schools are covered by MOE Independent School Bursary (ISB) Scheme. The Ministry of
Education also has bursary schemes and loans for post-secondary education. All government
ministries and statutory boards also offer scholarships and sponsorships (MOE, n.d.). This does
not account for other programmes, some of which are founded by charities and corporations, that
cover miscellaneous costs including pocket money for recess, overseas experiences, to even free
tuition.
All in all, an umbrella of financial support is more widely accessible than before, allowing poorer
students to partake in a more holistic school-going experience. Yet, despite these programmes
and policies, the ongoing class divide in education seems to be wider than ever.
Challenges
Social Equity Gap
The perception of top schools in Singapore being a reflection of personal merit dates back to their
origins. For instance, junior colleges were the brainchild of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew,
who wanted a ‘super secondary boarding school’, explicitly branded to provide the best quality
education and a direct pipeline into university. This had the consequence of generating intense
competition for junior college and university placements. Despite shifts in recent years where
polytechnic diploma holders are increasingly touted by the government to be competitive in the
10workforce, a monthly starting salary gap of over $1,000 (and thus about 50% of the median
monthly polytechnic starting salary) still persists between diploma and degree holders (Ministry
of Manpower, 2019). A further barrier to entry exists given how degree programmes generally
cost a lot more than diplomas and might thus be out of reach for poorer families.
When put against each other, a sense of division between the different streams is easily bred.
Despite governmental attempts at providing equal access to the education system, the resource
gaps springing from external factors such as socio-economic status persist. For instance, even
though subsidised or free tuition is offered to underprivileged students, this is also in contrast to
more expensive and intensive tuition centres aimed at middle- and upper-income families, often
touting selling points like tutors from prestigious backgrounds and access to exclusive learning
materials. With the highest quintile of Singaporean households spending four times as much on
tuition as the lowest quintile (Seah, 2019), this is at least one advantage the well-to-do possess
which can translate into improved academic performance.
Lower-income families might also lack the familial and cultural resources to help their children
achieve better results academically (Paulo & Low, 2018). Some forms of financial support, such
as Edusave, are also not progressive as they are a lump sum regardless of one's socioeconomic
background. Other school admission policies, including allocating school placements through
proximity drawing and alumni affiliations, advantage wealthy families who can either afford to live
near the top schools or are affiliated with them (Tan & Tan, 2016), as illustrated by the infamous
'Bukit Timah belt' of top schools. Some mitigating measures have been implemented, such as all
primary schools having to reserve at least 40 places or 1 class for 'non-affiliated' students, and
2013 MOE guidelines that that every 100 Secondary 1 students in a school should come from 20
or more primary schools (Awang, 2019).
11There is also a question of whether lower-middle class families who exceed the threshold for most
bursaries or schemes can receive adequate support, or risk being overlooked. Minister for
Education Ong Ye Kung himself once noted in Parliament that as "...we successfully uplift more
poor families, the smaller group of families that remained poor are facing increasingly difficult
challenges. Their challenges are also translated to their children’s performance in school. So as
we uplift poor families, the greater the achievement gap between the rich and poor.” (MOE, 2018).
This inequality manifests in the different profiles and results from students in various institutions.
For instance, 46% of students from the lowest socioeconomic quartile were concentrated in the
same schools (Teng, 2018), often labelled as 'neighbourhood schools' as opposed to so-called
elite institutions. Another 2016 study by the Singapore Children’s Society (SCS) found that 40.7%
of IP students come from families with monthly family incomes of over $10,000, and 30.7% of
them live in private housing, compared to corresponding figures of 7% and 2% respectively for
government school students (Teng, 2016).
Results wise, socio-economically disadvantaged Singaporean students score over 120 points
lower for PISA tests than their more privileged counterparts for Maths and Science tests, a gap
exceeded only by other nations with similar or higher income inequality (CIA, n.d.), and its equity
in Reading by social background is also below the OECD average (PISA, 2018). Given the
extremely competitive grade profile required to enter the most sought-after programs at the post-
secondary level (such as top junior colleges or degree programmes), since PISA measures the
abilities of 15-year olds, this will have a knock-on effect on their lives subsequently.
12Stigmatisation
Right from the get-go in the history of junior colleges, whoever managed to attend these schools
were thought to unquestionably be deserving. Some even called the pioneer batch of students
the ‘lucky six hundred’ and ‘super students’ (NLB, 2014). One unintentional consequence was
that students who failed to break into these upper echelons must thus by virtue of their exclusion
be less intelligent or less deserving of recognition. In fact, a general societal misconception began
to develop that this was the only way to be successful in life, and students who undertook
alternative pathways (including not attending the best schools at every juncture) might expect to
find their credentials questioned, and opportunities reduced.
Some attempts at rectifying this perception issue include MOE revising its school funding formula
to make resource allocation more equitable according to the size of school cohorts, to dispel
notions that 'neighbourhood' schools with larger enrolments are more resource-strained, and
fostering a more uniform inter-school culture by increasing collaborations between schools,
encouraging principals, teachers and students to share knowledge and work together across
schools (TODAY, 2014).
Despite the government and MOE's attempt at messaging anti-discriminatory measures, such as
emphasising that 'every school is a good school', the stigmatisation of students who do not hail
from 'top' schools or programmes persist. Many students report not having many conversations
with students from other streams due to differing social backgrounds, and perceptions from
Normal stream students that they felt looked down upon and judged as inferior. Singaporeans in
general, including students, felt most comfortable socialising within their own communities (Paulo
13& Low, 2018). Students who struggle with academics at a young age are quick to be labelled as
‘slow’, and report being made fun of by peers and developing inferiority complexes (Teo, 2018).
Another data point showing disparate attitudes was the SCS study which found that IP students
felt 2.5 times more confident in getting a degree than students from other schools (Teng, 2016),
possessed greater stress resilience and confidence in their finances and future education
prospects. This might reflect a tendency for labels to become self-fulfilling prophecies, as well as
accelerating the differences in school resource and network levels (Ng & Senin, 2019).
Even when lower-income children qualify for top schools, their lack of family resources could
result in various detrimental effects such as underperforming relative to higher-income classmates
in elite schools, reinforcing stigmatisation from their admission process (as some may see them
as 'filling a quota'), and lowering self-esteem which also significantly determines their individual
performance. (Lim & Pang, 2018). This effect is compounded by the Direct School Admissions
(DSA) scheme created in 2004, which allowed direct enrolment into schools through outstanding
performance in co-curricular activities (CCA), but in practice may result in stereotyping that who
enroll through this means are academically lacking.
Projecting into the Future
MOE is grappling with increasing social inequity in the education system, with policies not fully
working to resolve the issue. With a relatively high Gini coefficient (i.e. income inequality) of 0.458
(CNA, 2019) and poorer students increasingly concentrated in the same schools (growing from
41% to 46% between 2012 and 2015), the social equity gap is only set to worsen if more is not
14done to help the needy. The reduction of this gap is crucial to ensuring everyone is truly on a level
playing field. Additionally, with socio-economic status currently linked to how strong a student’s
sense of belonging is to their school (Chua, 2018), it is imperative to ensure that all students feel
the same sense of belonging.
MOE is looking to revamp the curriculum and examination structure across the entire educational
spectrum. For instance, the current T-score system for PSLE will be replaced by a Academic
Level score system which grades students according to their own level of proficiency in a subject.
This is done to minimise the tendency to compare and rank, and by extension stigmatise, students
based solely on examination results.
The current ‘O’ and ‘N’ Levels will also be replaced with standardised national exams by 2024,
with a new Subject-based Banding (SBB) system where students may take a basket of subjects
at varying difficulties according to their precise strengths (MOE, 2019), rather than be relegated
entirely to a fixed academic band. This would theoretically also encourage mixing students of
different abilities and backgrounds together in the same class and promote a growth mindset
amongst all students (Mokhtar, 2019).
While all these proposals will go a long way to counter stigmatisation and inequality, a lot of their
effectiveness will also hinge on whether society itself changes, by allowing students to thrive
without the fear of being looked down upon or judged, by celebrating not just their academic
performances, and by working to nullify the advantages that can be simply bought through money.
15Conclusion
The financial burden of education is great for low income families, and educational opportunities
are more likely to be missed due to financial reasons. Government financial assistance has gone
a long way to help students, but increasingly, low income families need more than just money for
food and school materials. Low income students still have to compete against other students who
can either afford more tuition or have extra time for studying since they have no need to work.
The government is also increasingly aware of the fact that our obsession with sorting and
streaming students needs to be replaced. However, it is still not yet clear what exactly will be
replacing the ‘O’ and ‘N’ Levels after 2024, beyond a common national exam that is no longer
segregated (Chia, 2019). Furthermore, members of Parliament like Denise Puah have called for
the government to ‘slay the sacred cow’ of the education system known as PSLE (Ang, 2019).
Overall, a lot of work is left to be done to improve equity in Singapore’s education system.
Representatives will need to consider the trade-offs between providing equality of opportunity
while ensuring meritocracy (i.e. fair advancement through individual performance) remains the
bedrock of our educational system.
16Questions for Discussion
1. Who are the key stakeholders in the education system (ministries, statutory boards etc)
that can help affect systemic reform?
2. What are the costs (not just financial) of replacing or changing the education system? Do
the benefits justify the means?
3. What other policies can be implemented to help low income families afford the same
quality and amount of education?
4. Are current financial assistance schemes enough to uplift lower income families?
5. How can Singapore ensure true equal opportunities to succeed in the education system?
6. Besides income, are there any other factors which may create inequity in the education
system?
7. Is the stigmatisation of students systemic or cultural? How can Singapore change
society’s mindset on success purely being based upon grades?
8. What should replace the ‘N’ and ‘O’ Levels by 2024?
9. Can the social divides between students be reduced through more initiatives for
socialising and mixing?
17Bibliography
Ang, J. (2019). Denise Phua again calls for MOE to abolish ‘sacred cow’ of PSLE. Retrieved
from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/parliament-denise-phua-again-calls-for-
moe-to-abolish-sacred-cow-of-psle
Ang, J. (2020). IB results: Singapore wins big with 35 out of 69 perfect scorers globally.
Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/ib-results-singapore-tops-
asia-pacific-region-with-65-out-of-the-69-perfect
Awang, N. (2019). Social mixing in schools has improved based on government indicator, ‘must
not be left to chance’. Retrieved from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/social-mixing-
schools-has-improved-based-government-indicator-must-not-be-left-chance
Channel News Asia (2019). Singapore household incomes grew in 2018, income inequality
stable. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-household-income-grew-in-2018-
income-inequality-11238462
Chia, L. (2019). Current approach to streaming in secondary schools to be phased out by 2024.
Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/streaming-secondary-schools-o-n-levels-
ong-ye-kung-11312252
Chia, L. (2018). New Direct School Admission portal to be launched next year to simplify
application process, Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/new-direct-school-admission-portal-
launched-next-year-education-10907836
Chua, A. (2018). Singapore has the highest gaps in sense of belonging at school between
students of different socio-economic statuses: Report. Retrieved from
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/singapore-gap-widens-students-sense-belonging-
school-tied-socio-economic-status
Central Intelligence Agency (n.d.). The World Factbook. Retrieved from
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html
Data.gov.sg (2019). Estimated Singapore Resident Population in HDB Flats. Retrieved from
https://data.gov.sg/dataset/estimated-resident-population-living-in-hdb-
flats?resource_id=a7d9516f-b193-4f9b-8bbf-9c85a4c9b61b
Ho, S. (2016). Vernacular education. Retrieved from
https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_2016-10-03_094744.html
International Baccalaureate (n.d.). Benefits of IB for students.Retrieved from
https://www.ibo.org/benefits/
18Joint Polytechnic Admissions Exercise (n.d.). About JPAE. Retrieved from
https://jpae.polytechnic.edu.sg/app
Loh, J. (2017). More can be done to facilitate mixing among people of different social classes,
IPS survey finds. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/more-can-be-done-to-facilitate-mixing-among-people-
of-different-9816610
Lee, S., et al. (2008). Toward A Better Future: Education and Training for Economic
Development in Singapore since 1965. Retrieved from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRREGTOPEDUCATION/Resources/444659-
1204656846740/4734984-1212686310562/Toward_a_better_future_Singapore.pdf
Lim, L. & Pang, E.F. (2018). Commentary: Can education fix inequality in Singapore? If not,
what can?. Retrieved from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/can-
education-fix-growing-inequality-in-singapore-10308796
Mokhtar, F. (2019). Secondary school streaming to be abolished in 2024, replaced with subject-
based banding. Retrieved form https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/secondary-school-
streaming-be-abolished-2024-replaced-subject-based-banding
Ministry of Education (2018). Parliamentary Motion “Education For Our Future” Response by
Minister for Education, Mr Ong Ye Kung. Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/speeches/parliamentary-motion-education-for-our-future--
response-by-minister-for-education--mr-ong-ye-kung
Ministry of Education (2017). MOE's move ensures every child has equal chances. Retrieved
from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/forum-letter-replies/moe-s-move-ensures-every-child-has-equal-
chances
Ministry of Education (2016). Expansion of Aptitude-Based Admissions for Students Pursuing
Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/press-releases/expansion-of-aptitude-based-admissions-for-
students-pursuing-higher-education
Ministry of Education (2007). Strong Foundation. Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/about/publications/50-years-of-sg-education/strong-foundation
Ministry of Education (n.d.). Financial assistance. Retrieved from https://beta.moe.gov.sg/fees-
assistance-awards-scholarships/financial-assistance/
Ministry of Education (n.d.). Integrated Programme (IP) - What’s Next. Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/microsites/whats-next/for-psle-students/where-do-i-want-to-
go/integrated-programme-ip/index.html
Ministry of Education (n.d.). Subject-based banding for primary school. Retrieved from
https://beta.moe.gov.sg/primary/curriculum/subject-based-banding/
19Ministry of Finance (n.d.). Government’s Efforts to Address Socio-Economic Inequality.
Retrieved from
https://www.mof.gov.sg/Newsroom/Parliamentary-Replies/Government-s-Efforts-to-Address-
Socio-Economic-Inequality
Ministry of Manpower (2019). Table: Graduate Starting Salary 2018. Retrieved from
https://stats.mom.gov.sg/Pages/Graduate-Starting-Salary-Tables2018.aspx
Ng, I. Y. H., & Senin, N. (2019). Phasing out streaming: First step to decreasing educational
inequality. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/phasing-out-streaming-first-step-
to-decreasing-educational-inequality
Ng, K., & Toh, E.M. (2018).Social stratification — a poison seeping into Singapore’s housing
estates and schools. Retrieved from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/the-big-
read-social-stratification-a-poison-seeping-into-10283526
National Library Board (2015). Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) is introduced.
Retrieved from http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/48628c96-7506-4675-8a02-
3b3fdc510d9b
National Library Board (2015). New Education System (NES) is introduced. Retrieved from
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/832f0610-d78c-4560-a2d5-b72c2858ce1a
National Library Board (2015). SCHOOL OF THE ARTS IS OPENED. Retrieved from
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/a9ed544a-cdfc-4764-889b-18b65b29b15f
National Library Board (2014). Gifted Education Programme is introduced. Retrieved from
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/74f49f3c-3536-4ef0-8d33-8e985275fb85
National Library Board (2014). National Junior College. Retrieved from
https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1015_2011-06-22.html
National Library Board (2011). Institute of Technical Education. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20130729063152/http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_1835_2011-08-
31.html
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2019). Compare your country by
OECD - Singapore. Retrieved from
https://www.compareyourcountry.org/pisa/country/SGP?lg=en
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2018). Equity in Education:
BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS TO SOCIAL MOBILITY. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-
ilibrary.org/sites/9789264073234-4-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/9789264073234-
4-en&mimeType=text/html
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (n.d.). Programme for International
Student Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/
20Programme for International Student Assessment (2018). Singapore. Retrieved from
http://www.compareyourcountry.org/pisa/country/sgp?lg=en
Parliament of Singapore (2007). Parliament No. 11, Session No. 1, Volume No. 82, Sitting No.
7, Sitting Date: 22-01-2007, Section Name: WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS, Title:
STREAMING IN SCHOOLS (Review). Retrieved from
https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=051_20070122_S0010_T0006
Parliament of Singapore (2004). Parliament No. 10, Session No. 1, Volume No. 77, Sitting No.
14, Sitting Date: 18-03-2004, Section Name: BUDGET, Title: HEAD K - MINISTRY OF
EDUCATION, HEAD K - MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, HEAD K - MINISTRY OF EDUCATION.
Retrieved from https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?reportid=004_20040318_S0003_T0002
Paulo, D. & Low, M. (2018). Class – not race nor religion – is potentially Singapore's most
divisive fault line. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/cnainsider/regardless-class-race-religion-
survey-singapore-income-divide-10774682
Seah, K. (2019). Tuition has ballooned to a S$1.4b industry in Singapore. Should we be
concerned?. Retrieved from https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/tuition-has-
ballooned-s14b-industry-singapore-should-we-be-concerned
Straits Times (2016). The education system over the years. Retrieved from
https://ww.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/the-education-system-over-the-years
Tan, E.S. & Tan, M.W. (2016). Two stories on class in Singapore: Diversity or division?,
Managing Diversity in Singapore. World Scientific.
Teng, A. (2019). From EM3 to subject-based banding: how streaming has changed over the
years. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/from-em3-to-subject-
based-banding-how-streaming-has-changed-over-the-years
Teng, A. (2018). Nearly half of low-income students in Singapore attend the same schools.
Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/nearly-half-of-low-income-
students-in-singapore-attend-the-same-schools
Teng, A. (2018). Parliament: Four specialised schools receive more resources to support
special needs students. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/parliament-four-
specialised-schools-receive-more-resources-to-support-special-needs
Teng, A. (2016). Students in IP schools more confident of getting at least a university degree.
Retrieved from
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/students-in-ip-schools-more-confident-of-
getting-at-least-a-university-degree
Teng, A. (2016). Study: Kids from affluent families more likely in IP, GEP schools. Retrieved
from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/study-kids-from-affluent-families-more-
likely-in-ip-gep-schools
21Teng, A. (2019). Why they proposed streaming in schools 40 years ago. Retrieved from
https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/why-they-proposed-streaming-in-schools-40-years-ago
Teo, Y. Y. (2018). This is what inequality looks like. Ethos Press.
The Economist (2018). What other countries can learn from Singapore’s schools. Retrieved
from https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/30/what-other-countries-can-learn-from-
singapores-schools
TODAY (2014). MOE revises funding formula for independent schools to ensure equity.
Retrieved from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/moe-revises-funding-formula-
independent-schools-ensure-equity
Yang, C. (2017). Angus Ross Prize: Cambridge axes top literature prize for A-level students.
Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/cambridge-axes-top-literature-
prize-for-a-level-students
22IMPROVING PRESCHOOL EDUCATION
The Singapore education scene is one that is always evolving based on the needs of the nation
and her people. Since her independence, efforts have been made to improve Singapore’s social
and educational development, as these are fundamental for allowing a country to thrive through
its people. The children of today will become the future of Singapore; thus, it is crucial for them to
be able to receive proper education from early on in their lives. Many believe that preschool
education is the launch pad of a child’s life; it may be a major determinant of whether the child
will be able to attain success in the future.
Taking the ‘kiasu’ nature of Singaporeans into account, the pursuit of a head start tends to be
aggressive, especially amongst parents of young children as they would want for their child to
strive for the best (Ng, 2016). From a survey conducted by Straits Time and research company
Nexus Link, it was discovered that 4 in 10 families in Singapore sent their preschool children for
tuition (Teng, 2016). A common motivation for this was parents wanting their young children to be
able to keep up with their peers, while a third of them believed that tuition would help improve
their children’s grades, even though they were only in preschool. This shows there are a sizable
number of parents out there who are willing to fork out the money in order to provide additional
support for their child. Despite their young age, parents believe that engaging external help such
as tuition would make for a good start to their child’s learning journey (Heong, 2018), while merely
adds on to their stress and limits time for play in reality (Jenner, 2017).
23Background Information
Preschools, also known as kindergarten or child care centres in Singapore, are educational
establishments providing early childhood (EC) education to children before they begin
compulsory education at primary schools. Kindergartens in Singapore offer up to three years of
preschool education for children ages three to six. They are commonly known as Nursery,
Kindergarten 1 (K1) and Kindergarten 2 (K2) respectively.
Kindergartens in Singapore tend to be classified into three tiers - Premium, Anchor Operators
and Partner Operators.
Premium
Premium childcare centres are privately-owned. They are generally located in prime locations
and private estates, typically offering special teaching pedagogy, and tend to expose students to
a wider range of learning experiences. Examples of such centres are MindChamps and Pat’s
Schoolhouse, which offer bilingual classes as a selling point while other centres provide creative
learning and art classes. Premium operators generally have a higher teacher-to-student ratio to
boost the attention and care a student receives. With these specialised programmes and
additional services, monthly fees of premium childcare centres tend to be significantly higher
than other types of childcare centres.
24Anchor Operators
Anchor operators are private-run childcare centres, which makes them similar to premium
childcare centres. However, the main difference between premium and anchor operators is that
anchor operators receive funding support from the Ministry of Social and Family Development to
provide quality early childcare and education at affordable prices. Anchor operators receive
funding to keep its monthly fees at a cap of S$770.40 (before GST) for full-day childcare, and
they are funded by the Anchor Operator Scheme (AOP). Examples of anchor operators include
My First Skool (operated by NTUC) and Skool4kidz (operated by a consortium led by Kinderland
Educare).
Partner Operators
Partner operators work in the same manner as anchor operators, although they receive funding
under the Partner Operator Scheme (POP). While anchor operators have a cap of S$770.40 on
their monthly fees, the cap for monthly fees for partner operators is between S$856 and S$1,498.
Some examples include Carpe Diem Holdings and The Little Skool-House International Pte Ltd.
25Development of Preschool Education in Singapore
1960s The Birth of PAP Kindergartens
With an increasing need to groom children for primary school education, the People’s Action Party
(PAP) introduced low-cost kindergartens. Over the years, this service became popular amongst
parents, thus catalysing the increase in the numbers of kindergartens (PCF, n.d.).
1986 PCF Kindergartens
The PAP Community Foundation (PCF) was formed as the charitable arm of the PAP, consequently
rebranding all PAP kindergartens as PCF kindergartens. With the economical and structural
development of Singapore and with the rise in construction of public housing, a majority of PCF
kindergartens were located at Housing Development Board (HDB) void decks and is currently
Singapore’s largest preschool operator.
Since 2011, PCF has started bringing all its kindergartens and childcare centres under a centralised
system to address the issue of uneven standards at different centres (Yuen-C, 2016). In 2019, PCF
has announced that they will be converting 80 of its kindergartens to facilities offering full-day
childcare over the next four years (Lai, 2019). With more than 50 PCF kindergartens having
undergone this conversion last year, this conversion will be part of the Government’s plan to increase
the number of childcare spaces, especially in younger estates such as Punggol, Sengkang and Choa
Chu Kang. Additionally, the PCF runs the chain of Sparkletots preschools, and is expanding its
curriculum to introduce concepts in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, innovation and
entrepreneurship. This approach is currently being used at 12 preschools, with more to kick in place
in the near future.
262012
Nurturing Early Learners Framework
Revised in 2012, the Nurturing Early Learners (NEL) Framework is a curriculum framework for
kindergartens in Singapore (MOE, n.d.). Developed by the Ministry of Education (MOE), the NEL
curriculum provides a set of resources to support early childhood educators in creating quality
learning experiences for children attending preschool. It includes a parallel set of resources for
Mother Tongue Languages (NEL, n.d.).
2013
Early Childhood Development Agency
The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) was officially launched on the 1st of April 2013.
Jointly helmed by MOE and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), the EDCA is an
autonomous agency that is hosted under the MSF. It serves as the regulatory and developmental
authority for the early childhood sector in Singapore across both kindergartens and childcare
centres. With the existence of ECDA, the oversight of kindergartens is transferred from MOE to
ECDA (ECDA, n.d.).
The ECDA has also developed a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Masterplan 1 for the
early childhood sector that encompasses the provision of CPD courses that aim to raise the quality
and professional experience of EC educators (ECDA, n.d.).
2014 The Birth of MOE Kindergartens
The first five MOE kindergartens were set up within HDB heartlands, mainly in existing primary
schools (MOE, 2013). This provided more affordable preschool education and aimed to raise the
quality of early childhood practices in the diverse preschool sector in Singapore.
27The curriculum in the pilot kindergartens will be guided by the principles spelt out in the refreshed
Kindergarten Curriculum Framework (KCF), also known as the NEL framework, which goal is to
nurture children holistically (MOE, 2013). The curriculum will feature distinctive Singaporean content
by incorporating local themes, stories and songs that draw on things and experiences familiar to
children. The curriculum will also include resources for Language and Literacy development - in both
English and the three official MTLs, namely Chinese, Malay and Tamil for children to develop
auditory and vocal skills that will facilitate their language learning in later years (MOE, 2013).
MOE will share the developed teaching and learning resources with other preschool operators. The
Ministry will also cooperate with preschool centres that offer recognised programmes to study
various approaches and identify best practices to enhance the learning of preschoolers. Such best
practices that are found to be scalable, sustainable and suitable for the Singapore context will be
shared with all preschool operators. These efforts will aid in the catalysing of quality improvements
in preschool education across Singapore. MOE and MSF will also continue to work with various
preschool-centre operators through the ECDA to raise the standards of early childhood education.
MOE will gather the views of the industry, public and parents as they venture into testing out the
different approaches and collaborating with the preschool sector to raise the quality of preschool
education in Singapore.
Moreover, there are plans to introduce 50 more MOE kindergartens by 2023 (Ying, 2017).
2017
Early Childhood Development Centres Act 2017
The Early Childhood Development Centres Act was passed by Parliament in 2017, with one of its
objectives being to increase regulation regarding the operation of early childhood development
28centres. As a result, all preschools in Singapore are required to obtain a license under the Early
Childhood Development Centres Act 2017 (Authority, 2017).
2019 National Institute of Early Childhood Development
The National Institute of Early Childhood Development (NEIC) is a centralised training institute that
specialises in grooming preschool teachers and carers. With the establishment of NIEC, all early
childhood faculty members will be brought together under one organisation (Chia, 2017).
Heightened Support for Preschool Education
With the announcement by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong during his 2019 National Day Rally
speech that more preschool subsidies would be provided (ECDA, 2020), and with plans to introduce
more MOE Kindergartens by 2023 (Chia, 2017).
In 2017, the Government has doubled its annual spending on preschools in previous years from
S$360 million in 2012 to S$840 million in 2017 (Chia, 2018). It will double its annual spending again
over the next five years: to S$1.7 billion in 2022. With this increase in funding, the preschool sector
of Singapore will see a vast improvement in its structure over the next few years:
- An additional 40,000 pre-school places, particularly for children aged up to four years old,
will be created in the next five years, as announced by Mr Lee. With the increase, the total
number of preschool places in Singapore will go up to 200,000, almost double what
Singapore originally had.
- Anchor operators will increase their preschool places for these children, where the shortage
of places is most prevalent. Preschool anchor operators, which include PCF, NTUC First
29Campus and EtonHouse International, will receive government grants in exchange for
keeping school fees affordable.
- Anchor operators will build Early Years Centres in new HDBs, which will then partner nearby
MOE Kindergarten, thus ensuring that the children in the Early Years Centre will have a place
reserved in that MOE Kindergarten, if the parents wish to accept.
Current challenges
With more working-class millennials becoming parents, especially in the 2020s, there will be a
surge in demand for full-day childcare services. Since the start of the 21st century, statistics from
the Ministry of Manpower show that labour force participation rates among female residents have
increased (MOM, 2018). Along with a larger proportion of elderly from the era of baby boomers
being more educated and thus less willing to act as main caregivers of their grandchildren in lieu
of other active aging activities (Straits Times, 2016), this causes an increase in demand for full-
day programmes offered by childcare centres, rather than half-day kindergarten services.
Consequently, this has led some kindergartens to close down and be converted as childcare
centres that offer full day programmes, as seen in the conversion of PCF kindergartens to
childcare spaces, catering to the needs of younger parents (Lai, 2019).
30Providing the capacity to accommodate diverse needs
This creates an area of contention as certain preschools that are targeted at niche demographics,
such as faith-based preschools, may close down due to the lack in demand for its services, since
these preschools typically do not offer full-day childcare services. An instance of this is the
situation faced by two Church-based kindergartens, Zion Kindergarten in Serangoon and St
Andrew's Cathedral Child Development Centre, have made known to parents of their pending
closure as they are struggling to stay in the EC sector (Wong, 2019). Research has shown that
there are now less than 80 of such church-based kindergartens, compared to about 120 in 2012
(Teng, 2019). In light of this, parents who wish for their child to receive a faith-based preschool
education are fighting to support the existence of such preschools by organising publicity events
that may aid in increasing the enrolment in such kindergartens (Wong, 2019).
Another example of diverse learner needs is those of preschool children with special needs, which
include early interventions and extra attention required. However, the combination of managing
children along with special needs appears particularly challenging, and as of 2018, there were
only 75 EC educators trained to deal with special needs (Sin & Tai, 2019).
Resource constraints
This expansion in number of full-day preschool placements, as many as almost 60,000 from 2011
to 2018, has also led to a resource crunch: 3,000 more early childhood educators are required to
reach the 2020 workforce of 20,000, and yet a range of factors cited from low wages to fatigue
and lack of career advancement options have led to consistent attrition from the field (Paolo, Peh
& Grosse, 2018). Some remedies have been attempted, including building more pipelines into the
31sector for students and mid-career switchers, as well as more attractive training programmes for
trainees.
Standardisation vs. Flexibility
In a Case Study of the Singapore Early Childhood Education and Care System, it states that
“Education—through schooling—has been central to producing the labour force necessary to
serve Singapore’s economic engine” (Bull et al., 2018). In the past, Singapore has been notorious
for running a factory-like system for its education system in order to produce efficient workers to
contribute to Singapore’s economy in the fastest time possible (Barr et al. 2011). An increased
standardisation would translate into replicating an ever-perfecting model of preschool education.
However, an issue that may arise from introducing more public MOE kindergartens and aiming
for standardisation amongst preschools island-wide is that this may prolong the issue of rigidity
within the education system. With the introduction of MOE kindergartens and plans to vastly
increase its numbers, this very well reflects the concept of ‘nationalised’ preschools that may
stipulate a set curriculum at each of its preschool centres. As a result, this causes unrest amongst
parents, as they believe that the running of preschool centres should not be limited to the oversight
of a general authority in order to promote diversity in today’s Singapore (Wong, 2019), and may
wish to focus on particular areas of interest of their choosing. Having various preschool operators,
or even allowing children to be home-schooled at the preschool level, allows for a wider range of
EC education philosophies for parents to choose for their children, thus providing every child a
unique growing experience, instead of going through a system that produces school children
through a set curriculum, at the expense of parental autonomy. On top of this, concerns have also
been voiced on whether the current EC sector is sufficiently mature and experienced to deal with
32children's holistic and unpredictable needs (Lim, 2019), and if too much emphasis has been
placed on accessibility of EC over quality.
Conclusion
With 50 new MOE kindergartens being built by 2022, and over 200,000 childcare and kindergarten
slots to be filled, this is an exciting time for EC to continue developing as a sector, especially with
the aid of an annual $1.7 billion investment. At the same time, a resource crunch and loss of
parental autonomy also highlights the tricky tightrope one must strike between nation building and
embracing creativity, and representatives will have to do likewise as well.
33Questions for Discussion
1. What are the trade-offs in pursuing standardisation of preschools?
2. With regards to standardisation, are we making the EC sector the best ‘one size fits all’?
Will this inadvertently cause children who are lagging behind/ home-schooled to lose out?
3. How can we ensure that the needs of diverse learners and of their parents are met
without compromising between values (i.e. religious aspects of church-run
kindergartens) and national objectives?
4. How can we ensure fairness in opportunity and choice amidst catering to all these
improvements?
5. Should the Government regulate all preschools? Would this be fair to private preschools
and their stakeholders?
6. How can we increase flexibility in an increasingly standardised EC sector that has a risk
in becoming a ‘factory model’?
34Bibliography
Ng, J. (2016). Play or Cram? Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/play-or-
cram
Teng, A. (2016, January). Starting from pre-school, parents sending kids for classes in race to
keep up with peers. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/starting-
from-pre-school-parents-sending-kids-for-classes-in-race-to-keep-up
Heong, S. K. (2018, August). Early Experiences Matter: Why Parents Shouldn't Neglect Their
Child's Pre-School Years. Retrieved from https://dollarsandsense.sg/early-experiences-matter-
parents-shouldnt-neglect-childs-pre-school-years/
Jenner, A. (2017, January). Do 4-year-olds really need private tuition? Retrieved from
https://www.todayonline.com/lifestyle/do-4-year-olds-really-need-private-tuition
The Online Citizen. (2018, November). The ultimate childcare centre guide that every kiasu
parent needs to know. Retrieved from https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2018/11/14/the-
ultimate-childcare-centre-guide-that-every-kiasu-parent-needs-to-know/
PCF. (n.d.). Kindergarten Information. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20120126003446/http://www.pcf.org.sg/viewarticle.aspx?wfc=KIND
ERGARTENINFO
Lai, L. (2019, October). PCF to convert 80 kindergartens to childcare centres over next 4 years.
Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/pcf-to-convert-80-
kindergartens-to-childcare-centres-over-next-4-years
Yuen-C, T. (2016, January). PCF to continue raising pre-school standards: PM Lee. Retrieved
from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/pcf-to-continue-raising-pre-school-standards-pm-
lee
MOE. (n.d.). Beta Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
https://beta.moe.gov.sg/preschool/curriculum/
NEL. (n.d.). About the NEL Curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.nel.sg/about-the-nel-
curriculum
ECDA. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved from https://www.ecda.gov.sg/pages/aboutus.aspx
ECDA. (n.d.). Continuing Professional Development. Retrieved from
https://www.ecda.gov.sg/Educators/Pages/Continuing-Professional-Development.aspx
MOE. (2013, March). MOE's First Five Pilot Kindergartens In Primary Schools And The
Community. Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/press-releases/moe-s-first-five-pilot-
kindergartens-in-primary-schools-and-the-community
Ying, F. J. (2017, August). 50 MOE kindergartens to open by 2023. Retrieved from
https://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/50-moe-kindergartens-open-2023
35Authority. (2017, May). EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTRES ACT 2017. Retrieved
from https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Acts-Supp/19-2017/Published/20170511?DocDate=20170511#pr6-
Chia, L. (2017, August). New National Institute of Early Childhood Development to take first
batch of students in 2019. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/new-national-institute-of-early-childhood-
development-to-take-9149528
ECDA. (2020, January). Subsidies And Financial Assistance. Retrieved from
https://www.ecda.gov.sg/Pages/Subsidies-and-Financial-Assistance.aspx
Chia, L. (2017, August). MOE to open 13 new kindergartens in 2019 and 2020. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/moe-to-open-13-new-kindergartens-in-2019-
and-2020-9149306
Chia, L. (2018, January). National Day Rally: 40,000 new pre-school places to be added in next
5 years. Retrieved from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/national-day-rally-
40-000-new-pre-school-places-to-be-added-in-9140174
MOM. (2018). LABOUR FORCE IN SINGAPORE 2018, LABOUR FORCE IN SINGAPORE
2018 (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://stats.mom.gov.sg/iMAS_PdfLibrary/mrsd_2018LabourForce_survey_findings.pdf
Paulo, D.A., Peh, Y. & Grosse, S. (2018, Oct). Why it's still so hard to have more early
childhood educators in Singapore CNA Insider Why it's still so hard to have more early
childhood educators in Singapore. Retrieved from
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/cnainsider/why-still-hard-get-early-childhood-
educators-singapore-preschool-10871542
ST. (2016, February). Childcare enrolment surges as more mums go back to work. Retrieved
from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/childcare-enrolment-surges-as-more-mums-go-
back-to-work
Wong, P. T. (2019, July). Parents fight to keep non-profit preschools alive, as popularity of MOE
kindergartens grows. Retrieved from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/parents-fight-keep-
non-profit-preschools-alive-popularity-moe-kindergartens-grows
Teng, A. (2019, July). End of the road for small pre-schools in churches? Retrieved from
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/end-of-the-road-for-small-pre-schools-in-
churches
Bull, R., Bautista, A., Salleh, H., & Karuppiah, N. (2018, October). Evolving a Harmonized
Hybrid System of ECEC: A Careful Balancing Act. Retrieved from http://ncee.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/03/EA-Singapore-Case-Study-022819.pdf
Barr, M. D., & Skrbiš Zlatko. (2011). Constructing Singapore: elitism, ethnicity and the nation-
building project. Copenhagen: NIAS.
Lim, S. (2019). Long-neglected but now in the spotlight, Singapore’s pre-school sector.
Retrieved from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/pre-school-enhanced-
subsidies-access-moe-kindergartens-11890488
36You can also read
