This piece is part of MS Speaks, a segment in which MS News reporters share their honest views on current affairs and trending topics.
–
In Primary 4, some of my classmates didn’t show up for school.
One day became a week and we eventually found out that they had moved on to “gifted” schools, having passed the tests the previous year.
In August, Singapore’s education ministry announced that academically gifted students no longer have to transfer schools and leave their friends behind.
All primary schools in Singapore will now be equipped to better support higher-ability learners.
The recent news has renewed discussions about the programme itself — do its benefits outweigh its cons, and is it still necessary in Singapore’s education system?
This year marks the 40th anniversary of the Gifted Education Programme (GEP), which was introduced in 1984 to identify and nurture intellectually gifted students in Singapore.
A quick check on the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) website lists the programme’s six goals.
These include developing “intellectual depth and higher level thinking”, and nurturing “moral values and qualities for responsible leadership”.
The process of singling out the brightest minds starts at Primary 3, when students are screened and then selected for the programme.
Source: Ministry of Education, Singapore on Facebook. Image for illustration purposes only.
During the screening stage, the child will take two papers — English and Mathematics.
Should they pass the first round and advance to the selection stage, students will also sit for a General Ability paper.
Before the MOE’s latest overhaul of the programme, selected students were invited to join one of nine schools:
Many aspects of the programme have changed since its inception all those years ago.
For instance, what started as a system designed to support a mere top 0.25% of students has now increased to 10% of the student cohort.
Although the GEP has evolved to include more students, it is still perceived as an exclusive club for the minority who are “special” — and in some way, better than the rest.
The sentiment is clearly highlighted in the word “Gifted”, an adjective used to describe a person with exceptional natural talent or ability.
Hardworking students who perform well at regular exams but do not get selected for the programme may feel like they’ve experienced a significant failure.
If they are not “gifted”, what does that make them?
Source: SmileTutor. Image for illustration purposes only.
Having a separate programme with additional testing — even if it’s optional — may also awaken the competitive nature in some parents.
Their nine-year-olds may then be subject to even more pressure than necessary.
The MOE website discourages parents from “test preparation activities” as these could inflate the scores.
However, let’s not forget Singapore’s infamous “tiger parents” who may still be doing just that behind closed doors.
One could argue that Singapore’s education has improved by leaps and bounds since the 1980s, to the point where a separate gifted programme may no longer be necessary.
A newsletter published by the University of Connecticut noted some reasons why countries develop these gifted programmes.
One driving factor for such programmes is “mediocre public education”, which bores the brighter students and fails to challenge them.
Source: Vietnam Teaching Jobs. Image for illustration purposes only.
Educators in the United Kingdom (UK) bemoaned the loss of the Young, Gifted & Talented Programme (YG&T) for this reason.
It targeted learners between four and 19 years old in state schools and aimed to raise standards and help students reach their full potential.
However, in Singapore, mass education is far from mediocre.
Primary and secondary education are academically comprehensive and relatively affordable to boot.
That said, Singaporeans remain divided over the necessity of the GEP.
A poll on Answers.sg showed that around 45% of 1,815 poll respondents disagree that GEP is necessary.
Meanwhile, 43% think that it is.
The programme has been applauded by those who have experienced it.
Former and current GEP students have praised the smaller class sizes and the programme’s curriculum, which emphasises creative and critical thinking.
33-year-old Jiahui Wee, who transferred from South View Primary School to Raffles Girls Primary School in 2000, recounted how the programme challenged her intellectually and kept her engaged.
“We were always encouraged to question the status quo and remain curious,” she said, recalling engaging math lessons about Roman numerals and hands-on science lessons where students cross-pollinated orchids.
Source: RGPS PVG. Image for illustration purposes only.
Ms Wee also felt that the programme was “much better at keeping [her] challenged” — a better alternative to just “cruising by in regular class” and feeling bored and demotivated.
The key difference, she said, was that students were always empowered to go beyond the textbook’s boundaries.
19-year-old Jayden, who attended the GEP in Catholic High School, also found classes to be “much more ambitious”.
“Many [students] ended up able to appreciate and understand academic subjects far beyond the required scope,” said the national serviceman.
However, being labelled as “gifted” came with high expectations and pressure from teachers, parents, and the students themselves.
Ms Wee shared that being in the programme can sometimes feel like a pressure cooker, where failure was often not an option.
Even so, the media professional found her time in the GEP “pivotal” — having met talented peers who inspired her.
“A girl who used to draw make-believe Pokémon/manga characters for us in class on scrap paper, went on to work for Disney and is based in New York,” said Ms Wee.
Jayden, an aspiring animator who chose to pursue a specialised diploma in polytechnic, also fondly recalled interactions with his classmates.
He further acknowledged that the programme may have allowed him to be more expressive of his abilities, even beyond academics.
That said, perhaps it is a good thing that the GEP is now being offered at every primary school.
If the programme has a track record of producing inspired Singaporeans, why not extend that opportunity to more students?
In a perfect world, Singaporeans will celebrate and nurture talents in sports, the arts, and academics equally.
Unfortunately, many parents — out of concern for their child’s future — still emphasise the importance of academics, sometimes at the expense of their child’s natural talents in other fields.
A solution to change this mindset could be for more primary schools to offer specialised programmes in sports and the arts.
The MOE Music Elective Programme (MEP) and Art Elective Programme (AEP) presently exist at the secondary school level.
However, even these are not widely implemented across schools.
Source: National Junior College
The MEP, a four-year programme designed for musically inclined teenagers, is only offered at 10 schools.
Meanwhile, the AEP for artistically inclined students is offered at seven secondary institutions.
Extending these programmes to the primary school level — similar to the GEP — could help identify gifted children in sports and the arts earlier.
More can be done to improve the support of young people in Singapore, starting with a shift in how we define success.
Instead of simply valuing excellence in academics, let’s also treat passion and interest in alternative fields with the same weight.
Also read: S’pore voted to have best education system in the world, beating Japan & UK: Poll
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image adapted from Home & Decor Singapore and Excel Tuition Agency. Images for illustration purposes only.
The coroner said this was the first case of its kind he had encountered in…
The brand-new jet suffered a series of technical issues since its first-ever flight on 19…
The Paradise Tree Snake may have misjudged its landing and ended up on the car.
The 69-year-old was reportedly upset over his neighbour's refusal to apologise.
False claims include that GCB transactions occur without government checks on beneficial owners' identities.
The suspect casually watched as the woman became consumed by flames.