On Future-Ready Education for All
Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)
Image: CNA; Watch full video here: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/committee-supply-2025-debate-day-5-denise-phua-future-ready-education-all-4981391
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Madam, Singapore's MOE has made remarkable progress in building a future-ready education system for all. No other country has invested so heavily or innovated so rapidly in education. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has painstakingly championed a broader definition of success and lifelong learning, but three significant barriers could hinder this vision.
Barrier one – on mindset. Despite MOE's efforts, many parents remain fixated on academic excellence or results, particularly excelling in exams, such as the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), to secure spots in what they perceived as, "better" schools. Similarly, adults are also under-utilising SkillsFuture programmes.
The greatest challenge lies in shifting mindsets to value diverse pathways to success and prioritise lifelong learning. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has rightly pointed out that systemic changes alone are not sufficient without cultural shifts. But since MOE has done as much as it deems possible, systemically, what additional plans are there in place to foster a mindset shift? Or is such a shift even possible?
Could removing the PSLE, a high-stake examination, and introducing a 10-year integrated programme from primary to secondary school level help to remove one hotspot or hotpoint, and maybe free time to also work on other important attributes and skills that support our future education model?
I have brought up this topic of removing PSLE and through-train integrated programmes for years now. But I think we need a deeper dive on this. It is no longer a question of removing PSLE or not, through-train or not. May I ask MOE to share what operational obstacles do exist, and are these obstacles insurmountable?
For adults, could every Singaporean gain access to formal skills development planning and coaching, not just those who are job-seeking? Could we also adopt achievable targets, like the 10,000-step health goal, to cultivate a habit of continuous learning? For instance, some multinational corporations (MNCs) I know set self-driven training goals, in terms of hours or programmes for their staff. Could this be explored and also scaled nationally?
Barrier two – on new literacies. A future-ready education must address technological disruptions, especially by artificial intelligence (AI). Nations and companies are already leveraging AI to transform education. So, I seek MOE's clarification on two points. What is the new literacy curriculum for learners in this age of rapid technological advancement? Two, how can we ensure that our learners become originators of ideas, not just consumers or managers of AI outputs and risk undermining development of their own critical and creative thinking skills?
Barrier three – on students with special educational needs (SEN). First, let me talk about SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs. Over 80% of our students with mild to moderate SEN are in mainstream schools, necessitating robust support systems. Beyond academics, they need life skills to navigate living and working, especially post-school. So, while initiatives like SEN officers and learning support offices are very commendable and I really appreciate it, current support does seem to fall short.
So, may I ask MOE what feedback has been received on the current support model for SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs? Are there gaps to be addressed? What is MOE's future plan in this space? What does it look like? How can stakeholders like the mainstream schools, IHLs, MOE's own special needs department, special education needs department and disability-focused SSAs and SPED schools even, improve knowledge sharing and best practices to strengthen support?
Let me also talk about SEN students in SPED schools. SPED students often need more time to master foundational skills for living, learning and working. Their need for lifelong learning is critical as technology transforms our world. However, the "cliff effect" – where support drops drastically after age 18 – stops progress for many of the adult learners with disabilities. This leads to skills loss, reduced independence, and increased burdens on families and society.
Can the Government commission a study to seriously address – study this "cliff-effect" and address the gaps thereof – and even adopt a top-up funding model for SEN adult learners, mirroring what was given before age 18?
Additionally, SPED leaders face overwhelming administrative workloads due to numerous policies and reporting requirements. While I appreciate MOE's increased support over the years, and I really think they are very good people in MOE for this, I urge a review to limit policies and reports to only the essentials and also to streamline processes.
Could SPED schools tap on public-sector systems – the good ones, like Form.gov.sg — GeBiz, or Demand Aggregated Vendor Lists to reduce their administrative burdens and improve efficiency?
So, in conclusion, Madam, Singapore is at the forefront of creating a future-ready education system that empowers every individual. If any nation can turn this vision into reality, I believe, it is Singapore. So, thank you, MOE.
Source: https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/sprs3topic?reportid=budget-2611