The Costs of Singapore's Prized Education System

Have you gone through Singapore’s education system? If so, have you felt the soul-draining, sweat-causing and shiver-starting stress before walking into an examination hall? While that may be a slight exaggeration, many Singaporean students will be able to relate to the crushing feeling of academic stress.

Singapore’s lauded education system has been the subject of envy for many countries, given its ability to develop children academically. In 2018, this envy was reinforced when Singapore’s students topped the Programme for International Student Assessment’s (PISA) global competence study. However, all is not sunshine and rainbows for Singapore’s children. Students here are among the most anxious, with many youths reporting symptoms of mental health illnesses. Not only that, but it is also evident that Singapore’s education system has failed to develop children creatively. This begs the question: What are the true effects of our education system on our children and what has the government done in response to these effects?

Let us first briefly introduce Singapore’s education system. Singapore’s children generally attend Primary School from the age of 7-12. At the end, they take the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) which determines which secondary school they go to and what subjects and level they can take on. By extension, this means that PSLE has a great influence on the opportunities and quality of education children receive after.

A detailed mind map of Singapore’s educational pathways

This meritocratic system is designed with the intention of encouraging hard work and self-development by rewarding people with good results. Through this process, the government hoped to develop a competitive and efficient workforce to attract MNCs’ investment. On top of this, it also hoped to use this system to support and groom extraordinary talents that could benefit Singapore’s technological level and companies so it can remain competitive amidst changes in the world.

President’s Scholarship

Due to the significance of grades as a barrier to entry to valuable opportunities, a heavy premium is placed by local parents on their child’s education. They want their children to be successful in the future–defined simply by a higher-than-average salary and a stable life. To them, this is necessitated by doing well in school. I’m sure we can all relate to being told a million times that we need to study harder as good grades will get us into a good school, which grants us access to better opportunities and a better job in the future.

All this results in Singapore’s hyperfixation on good grades as a marker for success. Unfortunately, this has detrimental effects on children in the form of stress and lack of creative development.

This hyperfixation on academic success means that the cost of failure is too high for children and parents to bear, which leads to pressure and anxiety. This causes the education system of Singapore to be a pressure cooker for its children as they are pushed to their limits in pursuit of academic success, especially given the competitive nature of the system where opportunities and resources are limited and, therefore, prioritised for the ‘best’. Evidently, this is manifested in the ‘kiasu’ and tuition culture that permeates Singapore which adds stress to children. Parents would enrol their children in all sorts of academic programmes, extra lessons and tuition so that their child would not miss out on any potential competitive edge towards academic success. It is no surprise that, according to Blackbox Research, 67% of children have been enrolled in tuition at some point.

Statistics showing the enrolment of Singapore children in tuition

This stress is further compounded by the fact that the definition of academic success and, by extension, the distribution of resources and opportunities is skewed towards areas the government prizes, such as STEM. Such a trend is visible from how much more government scholarships are reserved for STEM areas or requires the recipient to study in said areas compared to non-STEM areas. This means that children are generally pressured into devoting hours of their days into these areas of study, which they may or may not like. While this is probably fine for those who are inclined towards these subjects, those who are more inclined towards other areas (such as the arts) experience greater hurdles, increasing both their chance and fear of failure, and further compounding their stress.

Stress in moderate amounts is fine; in fact, it is even beneficial as a force for motivation. However, the stress in our education system has long gone past that point. This is reflected in how mental health professionals have observed symptoms of anxiety and excessive stress to be common in many children below the age of 12. The consequence of that is the alteration of children’s brain development and brain architecture, often negatively. According to paediatric experts from the Centre for Treatment of Anxiety and Mood Disorders in the US, the result of the aforementioned effect of toxic stress surfaces in the form of mental health issues, deterioration of social skills, and physical health problems.

In light of this, the government has taken steps to reduce stress in children to an acceptable level. The streaming system has been scrapped and replaced with a subject-based banding system. This change allows students with uneven strengths to not be pulled down by their weaker subjects and, therefore, have access to specific opportunities in their strengths. Alternative avenues of being admitted into schools such as the Direct School Admissions (DSA) have also been added. Additionally, more emphasis is placed on students’ non-academic achievements where opportunities such as scholarships are concerned. All three policies act to reduce the cost of failing to achieve academic success, reducing the pressure to attain said success and the stress level faced by children. Year-end examinations have also been removed for Primary 1 and Primary 2 children, which increases the amount of lull period where children do not have to stress out over academics.

Difference between Streaming and Subject-Based Banding

It is undeniable that while these policies have diverted attention from academic success and thereby reduced the amount of pressure felt by children, they have not been entirely effective. While the DSA has made it easier for students less academically inclined to obtain opportunities and resources, they still need to have some academic success in PSLE for the DSA offer to be realised. Subject-based banding, while on paper not streaming, fundamentally still operates like it. It simply does so on a subject-by-subject level which makes the change ineffective in reducing stress. Removal of examinations does not reduce the importance of PSLE, retaining the toxic stress caused by the latter. In some cases, the non-academic considerations for opportunities like scholarships add even more stress to children, as they have to fulfil even more criteria such as leadership positions or community service.

Taking these points into account, it is evident that the hyperfixation on academic success and the toxic stress from the education system have not been significantly reduced, and mental health professionals have witnessed an uptick in younger patients seeking help for anxiety and depression that are likely stress-induced. While there may be other causes of this uptick in patients such as an increasing recognition of mental health issues, the same professionals have pointed toward high academic workloads as the culprit. This suggests that toxic stress has in fact increased, painting a bleak picture of the mental health of Singaporean children.

With good grades being placed at a priority by the system, Singapore schools have also started to adopt a more exam-oriented method of instruction–which can possibly kill creativity and innovation. While pockets of time may be allocated to class discussion and group work, our education system is known to be top-down and didactic, as educators feed students with the necessary content needed for tests during lessons and lectures. This is coupled with tons of memory work and practise drills that are aimed strictly at examination preparation and being familiar with the common test questions.

One can argue that this style of education helps to train students to be disciplined, competitive, and efficient in their future work–after all, it teaches us to problem-solve and find effective study methods that will allow us to complete more work in a shorter period of time. Additionally, it does reward hard work and drive to a certain extent, therefore staying true to Singapore’s ideal of a meritocratic system.

However, it also ends up promoting a narrow way of thinking. The nature of our paper-based examinations results in a proclivity for there being only one right answer that all students have to strive towards if they want to obtain the best grades. Hence, many students in Singapore are unwilling to think outside the box, for they want to avoid the risk of being “wrong” based on the answer scheme. This creates a culture that fears failure; in a 2018 study by the OECD, 78% of Singapore’s students agree or strongly agree with the sentiment that “When I am failing, this makes me doubt my plans for the future”–the highest amongst 79 countries surveyed.

Such a risk-averse culture dampens the instinct towards innovation and enterprise, as students are beset with the mindset that they must never fail. This is why Singapore, despite producing top scorers in almost every international academic benchmark test, continues to lag behind many of the world’s innovative powerhouses. In the end, many children in Singapore grow up to only favour the safest paths to success, limiting themselves from their true creative potential.

With all that said, we must still acknowledge the efforts that the government has made to pivot the system away from being overly exam-oriented, and towards one that promotes critical thinking, inventiveness, and global citizenry. As previously mentioned , examinations have been removed for some levels and are replaced by smaller, weighted assessments–which may help to reduce the fixation on grades and promote learning for the sake of learning.

Additionally, the Ministry of Education has recently introduced the Applied Learning Programme (ALP), where children can approach learning from a more fun and hands-on angle, without needing to stress about tests and examinations. Different schools offer a different set of ALPs, and these range from exploring real life applications of physical science, drama, and public speaking, to basic coding skills. Such programmes help to nurture problem-solving skills, while also encouraging inquisitiveness, critical-thinking, and open-mindedness.

Robotics programme at Anglican High School

Singapore’s education system is not all bad too, as it is extremely successful at developing certain valuable soft skills that will benefit our students in their futures. Its rigorous system means that children have to put in extra effort to keep up with and stand out from the others. This extra effort comes in the form of things such as practice and a hard-working attitude. The result of these is an accelerated development in children’s cognitive capabilities in certain areas. Problem solving, scientific inquiry and analysis, and articulation of ideas are all areas Singaporean students are ahead of compared to most countries. The same PISA report indicates Singaporean students are a staggering 3 years ahead of American students in Mathematical skills. The former is also ahead in English and Science.

Singapore’s score in PISA

Additionally, one could also argue Singapore’s education system forces children to develop valuable life skills and character. With so many things to do with just 24 hours a day, Singaporean children learn time-management as a necessity to survive and meet parents’ expectations of academic achievement. This expectation of parents and the rigorous nature of the education system also nudge the character development of children towards diligence. When the cost of failure is so high, slacking off too much is not a risk that children dare to take.

But all in all, notwithstanding the positive impacts of Singapore’s education system, it seems that it still has a long way to go towards being the best for our children. With the recent changes to this system, we can only hope that they are a step in the right direction—towards one that truly develops children to be suitably prepared for the innovation-driven future of the 21st century without depriving children too much of their mental health.

Sources

Applied Learning Programme Announcement (2018): https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/parliament-all-primary-schools-to-have-applied-hands-on-learning-programmes-by-2023

Today’s Report on Fear of Failure (2019): https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/3-4-singapore-students-fear-failure-higher-global-average-oecd-study

OECD PISA Report (2018): https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_SGP.pdf

Blackbox Tuition Research (2012): http://www.blackbox.com.sg/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Blackbox-You-Know-Anot-Whitepaper-Private-Tuition.pdf

Centre for Treatment of Anxiety and Mood Disorders (2018): https://centerforanxietydisorders.com/tag/effects-of-stress-on-child-development/

Singapore University of Social Sciences (2020): https://www.suss.edu.sg/blog/detail/calling-for-help-our-children-s-mental-health

Picture Sources

Picture of Children Having Fun: https://www.stockvault.net/photo/113094/students

Picture of President’s Scholarship: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/presidents-scholarship-awarded-to-4-individuals-865491

Stressed Boy Picture:

https://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-angry-stressed-boy-image15094008