ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE - FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1998 TO 31ST MARCH, 1999 - (Paper Cmd. 3 of 1998)
Sir, once again I thank Members for their suggestions and views. They come from a number of very different perspectives. I think I would suggest that some of the Members discuss with each other and try and resolve some of the issues that they have brought up. First of all, allow me to address the issue of universities which is a subject I left over from yesterday. Mr Loh Meng See, Prof. Chin Tet Yung, Dr Toh See Kiat, Mr Ee, Mr Zainul and Dr Teo Ho Pin spoke about this. DPM, Dr Tony Tan, has outlined the key changes to university education at a speech at NTU last month. To recap, NUS and NTU are working to double their post-graduate intake by the year 2000. Both are working on broadening undergraduate education. Tertiary education opportunities will be expanded with the establishment of the Singapore Management University whilst Arts education will be boosted by impending changes to LaSalle/SIA College of the Arts and the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts. These changes will be announced sometime next month by Dr Tan Chin Nam. Will there be enough places for Singaporeans? Has there been an impact from the currency crisis? No, we have not seen any discernible impact from the currency crisis. I wish to assure Mr Loh that there will be enough university places for Singaporeans who, in Mr Loh's words, make the grade. The increase in intake of foreign students will be undertaken as part of the university's overall expansion plans and will not be at the expense of Singaporeans. There is flexibility to enlarge the intake in most courses if there is demand. In fact, for the coming academic year, 1998/1999, there will be increases in intakes in almost all the faculties, ranging from 1% to 11%, except for Dentistry, Law and Business, where the intakes will remain about the same. Members will understand the reasons for Dentistry and Law. For Business, we are making adjustments as well. The total intake will increase by about 4�%. For the academic year 1999-2000, a further 4�% increase in undergraduate intake has been projected. We will refine this number as we go along. So there is no shortage of places for Singaporeans. Has broadening affected professional disciplines? Prof. Chin asked about this yesterday. For professional degrees, there is a need to strike a balance between broadening and attaining sufficient depth of knowledge to satisfy professional bodies. This can be achieved through changes in the curriculum as well as by other means. For example, in the Law Faculty, as Prof. Chin knows, there are plans to take in a more diverse student body instead of relying on those who have completed their "A" levels. This is good for providing more diverse academic preparation for lawyers who may need to go into specialist areas like patents and trade law. Let me now turn to the SMU and OUDP which were raised by Mr Loh and Dr Toh. The establishment of the Management University in 2000 will result in an increase in the number of places for students wishing to pursue an undergraduate business course. While NUS will reduce its undergraduate Business Administration intake slightly from the current 600 to 500 in the year 2000, and NTU will stop offering its undergraduate Business programme, there will be more places available in SMU to make up for these changes. So in fact the Business intake will increase overall. The facilities given up by NTU's undergraduate Business programmes will be used for an expansion of NTU's post-graduate Business programmes and increase in the number of engineering students taking Business minors and to house the overall expansion in post-graduate students in all disciplines. As a private university, SMU will have some flexibility in setting fees and entry requirements. However, as SMU will receive Government funding, we do not expect its fees to be significantly higher than NUS or NTU. We do not expect them to be lower either. As announced by the SIM Governing Council in January, SMU will require both "A" level results and SATs from those applying in 2000 and beyond. SMU will be making other innovations in curriculum, campus design and other areas and I think this will be good for the university sector in Singapore. Mother tongue requirement for SMU. Bilingualism is a cornerstone of Singapore's education system. SMU has stated that applicants will need to satisfy the minimum grade in the mother tongue, as in the case for admission into NUS and NTU. There is no change to this policy and we do not intend to make any changes. The minimum requirement to apply for NUS and NTU is a grade of D7 in mother tongue, either as a second language taken at the "A" level examination or as a first language taken at the "O" level examination. Currently, candidates who do not satisfy the above requirements for mother tongue may still submit an application for NTU or NUS. If selected, they will be admitted on a provisional basis. During the course of their study, they will be required to meet the requisite minimum language requirements before they are allowed to graduate. I am sure SMU will apply the same flexibility for deserving candidates. SMU and OUDP serve different purposes. The establishment of SMU expands tertiary education opportunities for school-leavers as well as for some working adults. OUDP was established to provide opportunities mainly for working adults. How successful has OUDP been? The OUDP took in its first batch of students in 1994 and will see its first batch of 332 graduates this year, even though the average time taken to complete the degree programme is six years. I have great admiration for those who have taken the programme. It requires a lot of commitment and effort. Its current enrolment in the five fields of English, Mathematics, Computer Science, Technology and Psychology, stands at 5,100. OUDP started with three degree programmes, English Language and Literature, Mathematics and Computer Science and has since expanded to 15 programmes. It will continue to review its course offerings to meet the needs of working adults. OUDP's minimum admission requirement was raised by Mr Gerard Ee and Mr Zainul. They are already quite flexible. The academic requirement is 2 GCE "A" level passes or its equivalent or an acceptable local diploma. Other qualifications are considered on a case-by-case basis. These requirements are less stringent than those for applications to NUS or NTU, for example, the two "A" level passes that are required do not have to be at one sitting. 2.00 pm In addition, applicants need to have a minimum work experience, including NS, of two years and to be at least 21 years old. The requirement takes into account the applicant's work experience, life skills and maturity. I think we must all understand that some minimum academic requirement is needed to ensure that those who take up the programme have a reasonable chance of success. This will also give employers more confidence about the quality of OUDP and its graduates. The accreditation of private educational institutions is a point raised by Mr Loh and Dr Teo Ho Pin. The Ministry of Education does not regulate the offer of distance learning programmes originating from overseas tertiary institutions. It will become even more difficult to do so in the future when you have electronic communication and so on. The local organisations representing the overseas tertiary institutions have to seek the Ministry's authorisation to offer the programmes. The Ministry examines proposals, focusing attention on areas including the standing of the overseas tertiary institution and the programme to be offered. The prerogative of selecting a course of study, however, rests completely with the students. Prospective students would thus need to have a full understanding of what is being offered, including the cost of the programme and match it with his or her capacity, aptitude and resources available to pursue such studies. The best protection would be to conduct a careful and thorough evaluation prior to enrolling in a programme. Students owe themselves this responsibility. As for the OUDP setting the benchmark standards for distance learning courses set up by private educational institutions, I think it is already playing quite a useful role by providing another avenue for upgrading. I turn now to the University's admission system. Mr Chew Heng Ching, Mr Sinnakaruppan, Prof. Chin Tet Yung, all have made impassioned appeals for what they consider to be important qualities to be taken into account and hope that this will not distort the motivations of students when they take on all these important qualities in their school life. I just want to make one comment here. What we do in the University's admission system, as correctly pointed out by many Members, does not only have an impact on what type of students enter the universities. What we do in the University's admission system has a big impact on the whole school system because students who aspire to go to University will focus their attention and efforts on this. The Committee that is looking at this is cognizant of this point and will take all these into account. I will forward all the suggestions that Members have raised to Prof. Shih who is chairing this Committee. We do not want to prejudge the conclusions of this Committee. So I will leave it at that. But in the discussion on University's admission and ranking, I see two interesting trends in the whole discussion. On the one hand, there is a desire to say, "Okay, if you say this is important, then you should count it. If you do not count it, that means you are not giving importance to it." On the other hand, there is another argument raised by many Members here to say that, "Well, if you count it, then you distort the students' motivations in doing this. So you shouldn't count it." So on the one hand, you should count all the things that are important; on the other hand, you should not count it because, if it is important, the person really should be doing it for the love of it, and not because he gets points for it. So this is an interesting dilemma. I think basically we have to be realistic. If it is important, we should try and count it. And that is the approach which I think we have to take. The same dilemma exists in ranking. This is a subject which has been brought up by a number of people here. They say, "Well, you rank schools, it creates all kinds of distortions in the system." Dr Toh, I think, referred to the question raised at last year's debate. I can also refer him to the answer I gave in last year's debate. Ranking is something which we will not do away with in Singapore. I am open to ideas on how to improve the system but it is something which is valuable. It provides very valuable benchmarking for schools, for the Ministry of Education as a whole and for schools themselves to know where they stand. If the intake of students in School A is roughly the same as the intake of students in School B, and School A does better than School B, remarkably better than School B, I think the principals themselves would want to know why, what is it in School A which is interesting and useful which School B can take on for the benefit of School B's students. I think that is quite a reasonable objective of ranking and comparison. And all over the world, in the UK, in the US, in many states, ranking is now accepted as something useful. I must say that two days ago, I read an interesting article in the UK. They now rank schools quite avidly in UK, a lot of tests and a lot of ranking. And, in fact, I was very happy to see that they have just started value-added ranking which is something which we have done in our schools for several years already. I think what Dr Toh See Kiat has proposed with regard to ranking will make things even worse. He suggested putting weights on various kinds of things. In fact, we do not put weights today. What Dr Toh See Kiat is doing is trying to convert a vector into a scalar - a multi-factored description of a school, by assigning weights into a single number. In fact, we do not do that. I have a book here which addresses what Dr Toh was talking about. If you are selecting a school for your child, I have a book here which is produced in four languages, and it describes all kinds of things: ECA highlights, physical fitness level, aggregate range of pupils posted to that school, and a short write-up on the emphasis, achievements and awards which the schools write themselves to tell you what the school is like, what the school believes in. The publication is available. This provides a broader representation of what the school does when parents are selecting secondary schools for their children. It is also not true that the Ministry gives greater weightage to the pure academic performance of a school than its value-added. But the public may give greater weightage. The Ministry provides little cash prizes for value-added schools. We do not provide cash prizes for schools which do well purely by their subject grades. So I think what Dr Toh is proposing, which is to assign little weights to all these things, is, in fact, going to be quite counter-productive. Franchising and the quality of schools - Dr Michael Lim spoke about taking "good" schools and "replicating" them. This is one method of replicating good schools. But replicating good schools is not just a matter of transferring the brand name. Dr Lim, I think, has some brand names in mind. To produce a school of the same quality will require the right school leadership and mix of teachers. More importantly, this assumes that the student body is the same. A different student body is likely to require different teaching strategies and a different school ethos. A direct clone of a school, like Raffles Institution, for example, which tailors its programmes and methods for the very best of our students is unlikely to be suitable for all the students in Singapore. So we must be quite aware of this. I would also like to point out to Dr Lim that while he has cited certain schools, we should not be overly enamoured with brand names. These are schools which do extremely well. But there are also other schools which do extremely well which have names that are not instantly recognisable to the public or to Dr Lim. And by this, I do not just mean schools who have scored the best results. But, more importantly, the schools which produce the most value-added. These are schools which parents should be looking for. But I do agree with Dr Lim that good school practices and management know-how should be replicated so that we can improve our schools. And this is, in fact, one of the main reasons why we have done cluster schools. These are headed by senior principals with a proven track record. Leadership in the schools is important. Principals are important people. If you have a good principal, how do you increase his influence, how do you make better use of him. He can run one very good school, but if he has run it for half a dozen years, he has a very good school there. How do you increase his influence? One way is to have him as a head of a cluster in which the same principal, the same dynamism, his experience, can be extended to several other schools. So this is one of the reasons why we have cluster schools. Clusters will also enable schools to exchange best practices and so forth. And we also have a regular rotation of principals so that there is a steady flow of fresh ideas and energy in our schools. Dr Teo Ho Pin suggested ISO 9000 for our schools. We do have quality control measures in place in our schools. They are visited by inspectors. First of all, within the school, there is a quality control structure. The teachers are supervised by heads of departments and subject and level heads, and its vice-principal and principal. The inspectors of schools and the senior inspectors of schools, the curriculum specialists will visit the school, and so forth. There are school evaluations. There is ranking. And we also compare ourselves in international mathematics and science studies and so on with educational systems in other countries. So there are a number of quality control structures in place already. I am open to the idea of seeing how we can improve this and we will see whether Dr Teo's suggestion has merit. Dr Toh See Kiat wondered whether or not the schools and the HQ are in sync, whether the policies that are promulgated in the headquarters actually get executed in the schools. And I think