Deliverables of Education

Sir, I have six suggestions for the Minister to continue in the good work that MOE has started.

(1) Ensure a clearer line of sight between MOE's desired outcomes of education and its performance measures. The desired outcomes of education as stated on the MOE website are: young Singaporeans who are able to seek and apply knowledge, gracious, global yet rooted, morally upright and who embrace lifelong learning. Looking at the some 20 performance indicators in the Budget Book, it is unclear which indicators are linked to the desired education outcomes. The most celebrated and well-known performance indicators in our country still remain academic results and CIP hours. Sir, it is timely for the Ministry to update its list of performance indicators to reflect its priorities and value-add.

(2) Clarify the list of available education options to the public. In recent years, many exciting new school models have surfaced, eg, the Sports School, the Arts School, the NUS School of Science and Maths, the Northlight School, Pathlight School and the revamped ITE. This trend supports the Prime Minister's vision to provide multiple pathways for students with different talents and abilities. I ask the Ministry to develop a matrix that describes the target groups for which the different school models are developed and how they all fit in the landscape. This will clarify the options available to students and also highlight if any segments of the student population are over or under-served.

(3) Urgently enforce a tiered quality assurance framework for all MOE-registered schools and education centres not falling within the mainstream sphere. Sir, the wave of negative publicity on the appalling standards of private schools does not augur well for Singapore. Even special needs therapy centres are advertising themselves as MOE-registered centres to clients. One such centre is even mentioned in the MOE website. There is little due diligence on these MOE-registered organisations, and our Singapore brand equity in education is at high risk of being tarnished.

MOE must urgently put in place a tiered quality assurance system for all private schools, special schools, special needs intervention centres and even tutoring agencies. At entry level, minimum standards must be compulsory, not voluntary. The bar must not be too low. After compliance with minimum standards, these non-mainstream centres can then be encouraged to achieve higher levels of excellence, very much like the six-star system in the hotel industry.

(4) Encourage the shared services model amongst like-minded special schools run by voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). Special schools run by VWOs are sometimes criticised to be developmentally delayed themselves in the past. Quality is inconsistent and dependent on leadership capability, the type of staff that they are able to attract, and available resources. Out of the three sectors in the landscape - private, public and the people sectors - it is the people sector which can least afford to attract strong leadership and technical talent.

The status quo need not remain. Like-minded VWOs who want the best for their students should be encouraged to adopt what is called the shared services model in the corporate sector. VWOs can put aside their territorial instincts and join forces in functions, such as HR, hiring and training, management systems, curriculum, pedagogy, therapy and psychology support. This model is already manifested recently with the collaboration of the Autism Association of Singapore and the Autism Resource Centre to adopt the shared services model to run the special needs schools under them. Sir, more can be done in the sector.

(5) Deploy MOE staff to Special Schools for at least one to two years to install education fundamentals. In trying to help to level up the special education sector, what is required is not simply more governance. Many fundamentals, such as management systems and curriculum, are not yet in place. More thinking hands need to be deployed for execution work on the ground. Visionaries and critics are aplenty, but co-labourers in the field are scarce and overworked. Send the MOE staff out to work in the field.

(6) Urgently clarify the roles of MOE and NCSS in the running of Special Schools. School leaders now have to answer to at least two parties, ie, the MOE and the NCSS. The overlapping administrative reporting performance evaluation systems, meetings and numerous surveys required by the two agencies can be reduced, so that schools can stick to the core business of education.

In conclusion, Sir, I used to volunteer at a residential home for the disabled. There, I discovered that many of the adult residents were leading lives very much below their potential. Their lives could have been of a much higher quality had they received earlier and more effective education. Sadly, however, they were born in the dark ages of special education when expectations of them were very low and expertise to help them was very scarce. Sir, we must not let another generation of special needs Singaporeans pass us by without getting to their potential that they are given. Many need not end up disabled.

Lastly, Sir, I wish to thank and congratulate the Minister prior to his departure from the Ministry for having boldly led MOE in transforming our education landscape very positively.