Thoughts from Singapore

It has been good to spend some decent time in Singapore, and to visit one of the international schools there. Conversations with ex-pat parents never take long here to get on to schooling and I was massively informed by the excellent Lucy Crehan’s ‘Clever Lands,’ a great read for anyone interested in how top performing education systems operate. Indeed, I am indebted to her for much of the insight that I was able to apply when here in person, and in the rest of this particular blog.

Education is big in Singapore – the country is frequently at the top of the PISA tables (which compare educational performance across the world) and outstanding schools for the local population sit alongside some serious international schools such as Tanglin Trust (operating since 1925) and more recent additions including what seemed to be the current ‘must-go-to’ for ex-pats, Dulwich. The competition for places is fierce and a very selective approach at a relatively early age (10-12) in state schools puts huge pressure on young children and their parents, many of whom will take agreed leave when it comes to their children taking their primary school leaving exams. The pressure is understandable when one discovers that the routes available to children after primary school are very much mapped out as a consequence of the school they then go to, with different assessments, and therefore employment and higher education opportunities, according to the type of school you get into. It is like the old 11+ in the UK, but more rigid in terms of routes then available and little chance to change tack.

The downsides and problems of such a system are obvious. There is an assumption that intelligence is fixed and measurable so that once one classifies pupils as of one intelligence you then run the ‘correct’ route for them. There is little scope for late developers. Parents with time, intelligence or money can prepare their children better for the exams so it is harder for bright working-class kids to do well in the PSLE. The pressure on young children is not healthy – a 2000 survey Crehan quotes shows one third of 10-12 year olds feared their exams more than their parents dying, and 1 in 3 said life was sometimes not worth living. There is also a social concern that an academic elite turns into a social and cultural elite that lacks the empathy necessary for social/national cohesion: Crehan quotes a recent academic graduate saying, ‘we are a tyranny of the capable and the clever.’

And yet… one cannot ignore the clearly outstanding performance of the Singapore system on a number of levels. The education system has been at the centre of Singapore’s remarkable growth since it found itself unwillingly embracing independence when it broke from Malaysia in 1965. The irony of my being in Singapore at the moment Theresa May’s own ‘independence deal’ was defeated was not lost on me and our politicians would be well advised to note the resolute focus Lee Kuan Yew put on education at that point – realising that, alone and with limited physical resources, the one thing Singapore could and did invest in at that moment was the human resource of its people, through education. It is a lesson Dubai also seems keen to learn. Just because the system categorises pupils early, probably too early, does not mean of itself it is wrong to prepare pupils with different skills for different roles at some point. In fact, Crehan cites evidence to suggest the vocational education provided via Singaporean schools, especially in the last twenty years, has been of a high and relevant quality and low unemployment rates see people being prepared for all necessary jobs. I would like to think our approach at 16+ at Ryde, with three pathways and a personalised pathway is borne of similar principles – the key for us is to make decisions later and ensure there is flexibility throughout. Most critical is ensuring the quality of each route is equally resourced and valued. It is also the case that performance in the key PISA indicators of reading, maths and science is good for all pupils in Singapore, not just those selected for the top schools, and the performance of weaker Singaporean students relative to other pupils in the world at the same level is strong.

I imagine some of this is cultural – aspiration is in the national psyche – and some is, according to Crehan, due to a positive attitude to teacher professional development with a strong emphasis on continuing professional development throughout a teacher’s career. That professional development particularly encourages teachers to collaborate and learn from one another. I was struck in my own school visit on the way in which the classrooms were laid out – with much common space and relatively small spaces for individual teachers to operate in/retreat to. Even then, these spaces were very easy to see into and there was a constant flow of people. The criticism in Britain that teachers can too easily be territorial can create a competitive rather than collaborative environment, and limits the chance to learn from sharing. I also noticed very strong reflective elements to work, so next to a piece of art in the junior school, for example, were a series of questions; how did you create your work? What is the big idea? Did you learn anything new? Are you pleased with what you produced? Why? I found myself more interested in and impressed by the commentary than the work itself and so saw process as well as product on display.

A permanent challenge for schools is how we balance academic rigour with pastoral and emotional development. I would like to think they are not mutually exclusive, but there was a sense from what I have seen, read and heard here that in Singapore the former does at times compromise the latter and that may even have wider societal challenges with an unempathetic elite and with children growing up having missed some of their childhood. For the Singaporean children it is the challenge of the educational system, for the ex-pats the danger of growing up in an unreal bubble. I heard of girls unable to walk on uneven ground when faced with forest walks because all had been so perfect up until then and of pastoral staff on 24-hour suicide watch during exam periods. But I also saw a city state impressive in its confidence and having turned itself into one of the healthiest, most innovative and economically successfully countries in two generations, an achievement it could not have managed without the absolute commitment, from parents, pupils and politicians, to education at the highest level. Children growing up in Singapore today have some of the very best life chances anywhere in the world; does it matter if they quickly find themselves on preordained routes or don’t know how to walk in the woods? I’m not sure I know the answer, but it is a question that should be put.