Comparing class size and student-teacher ratios without comparing students' performance is telling half the story. And that's not being transparent.

Comparing class size and student-teacher ratios without comparing students' performance is telling half the story. And that's not being transparent.

Luxembourg has such a low student-teacher ratio and yet fared badly scoring even below the OECD average for all 3 subjects tested. What went wrong?

That said, it is not helpful to talk about 'small' or 'big' class size because different people have different ideas of what is 'big' or 'small' and we may end up arguing when we are actually in agreement.

It is better to talk about an optimum class size where the class size depends on the make-up of the class and students' needs. That is also the meaning of channeling more resources to struggling students.

When the class is too small, there is limited friendships and social interactions, individuals can easily dominate and hence disrupt the lesson. When the class is too big, students may not get enough attention.

An optimal class size creates opportunities for for students from diverse cultural background to interact, opportunities to collaborate in problem-solving, work in teams, develop leadership and communication skills.

It’s not really difficult to understand why Luxembourg did so badly. Give a thought to it. Do some critical thinking.

Class size: how small is small enough?

Class size

How small is good enough? There is no consensus anywhere on the ideal ratio or class size.

Currently here in Singapore, the average primary school class has about 30+ students.

Let's say we halve the size of the class. This means the number of teachers will have to be doubled. Similarly the number of classrooms will have to be doubled.

Currently, there are more than 15000 primary school teachers according to Education Statistics Digest from MOE.

To double the number of primary school teachers means hiring another 15,000+ teachers.

It goes without saying that there will be trade-off in teacher quality when numbers are ramped up significantly.

And where will you find another 15,000+ new teachers to hire? There are finite manpower resources and competing demands in other sectors as birth rates fall and smaller cohorts enter the workforce.

Will teachers still be paid the same salary?

With double the number of teachers, cost of salaries will double also. There will be less money for other developments - professional development, special programmes, student development etc.

What about the physical space?

Doubling the number of classrooms means building more primary schools. There are currently 177 primary schools. How many more primary schools must be built? Another 177 primary schools? Or will every existing classroom be divided into 2 and children put into smaller rooms with less space to move around?

It is better to have a quality teacher teaching a bigger class than 2 lousy teachers teaching 2 small classes.

The education system is never better than the quality of its teachers.

In other words, an education system is as good as the quality of its teachers.

It is easy to make a proposal. A politician must imagine himself implementing his own proposal.

The OECD which has studied many education systems concluded that reducing class size is not, on its own, a sufficient guarantee to improve the quality of education systems. Increasing the quality of teaching is often a more efficient policy lever to improve student performance than reducing class size.

This is not to say that class size does not matter.

It does and this is why our class size has been reduced over the years. It used to be 40+ per class.

Class sizes also vary based on subject and students' learning needs.

For example, classes for weaker students in the Learning Support Programme and Dyslexia Remediation Programme are conducted in classes of 8 to 10, and four to six respectively.

Primary 1 and 2 pupils have smaller classes so that they can better ease into formal schooling from pre-school education.

We look for an optimum class size that benefits students according to their needs, not a big or small class size.

Wrong ideas have to be challenged before they influence public opinion and make for problems.

Wrong ideas have to be challenged before they influence public opinion and make for problems. This is especially so in today's world where social media is a medium for propagating and entrenching wrong ideas.

Not only wrong ideas need to be challenged, hypocrisy needs to be exposed.

Wrong ideas like revealing the full size of Singapore reserves and encouraging currency speculation to stabilise the Singapore dollar put Singaporeans' jobs, livelihoods and careers at risk.

For a long time, the WP has pressured the government to spend more from reserves including the direct use of land proceeds for recurrent needs.

Yet, when the government had to dip into reserves because of a unprecedented crisis, they suddenly became very concerned with the dip and asked for an independent budget office to scrutinise the spending for outcomes.

WP calls for an independent body to examine spending, but you will also recall that they resisted an independent audit of their town council finances all the way from the beginning of the saga, fighting every step of the way in court against an independent body to review their finances. They talk, but do not walk their walk.

Singapore will make decisions on vaccines on the basis of science and healthcare needs

Singapore will make decisions on vaccines on the basis of science and healthcare needs. This is just another example of the way we conduct our policies.

We cannot be bought, we cannot be bullied, we cannot be intimidated into either approving or disapproving any vaccine.

We will make decisions on the basis of health and science.

There will be pressure for us, there will be push and pulls, but we must conduct this just like another example of foreign policy in a principled manner.

- Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan

WP is playing political games, and not interested in outcomes

WP is not interested in outcomes. They are only interested in playing a political game. The call for an INDEPENDENT budget office to examine government expenditures and outcomes is really to try to cast doubt on the government.

If WP is truly interested in outcomes, they would have poured over the interim report- which was widely reported in the media - to examine the measures achieved. But they haven't done so.

Watch DPM Heng Swee Keat's response to WP Pritam Singh's call for an independent budget office to examine outcomes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60H9XFtDsOw

Borrowing does not give you free money!

The Government's approach to borrowing is a carefully calibrated one. It does not borrow for recurrent expenditure.

It borrows for major long-term infrastructure. These investments will benefit and generate value over generations. But the upfront costs are hefty.

Borrowing is a fair and efficient approach to spread out the lumpy costs.

If we do not do so, taxes will be to be raised significantly to fund these major expenditures, Mr Heng said.

Recurrent expenditures - expenditures that are incurred every year - must be funded by recurrent revenue that are collected every year.

PSP Leong Mun Wai: spend every cent of NIRC returns

 

Mr Leong represents PSP's position. It is shocking to hear him suggest using 100% of NIRC.

Spend every cent of investment returns. Can someone help him to understand the consequences?