PSLEの学術的厳密性とAIスキルのバランス

9 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry considers that the academic rigour required to excel in the PSLE, such as rote memorisation and test-taking abilities (i) reflects the skills our youths need to thrive in the AI-driven economy, (ii) nurtures a lifelong love of learning and (iii) compares favourably with inquiry-based and collaborative learning approaches more common in other internationally recognised primary school curricula.

The Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Education) : Mr Speaker, the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) serves as a useful checkpoint on students' mastery of the primary school curriculum. It is designed to assess core concepts and skills in the primary school curriculum, including the ability to think critically and apply concepts in different contexts. PSLE does not emphasise rote learning or test-taking skills.

To prepare students for the future, schools also design co-curricular programmes, applied learning programmes, Character and Citizenship Education lessons and leadership opportunities to nurture students' 21st Century Competencies. While not all of these competencies, such as collaboration skills and inventive thinking, can be measured through a single exam, they are developed in the course of learning the curriculum. Our teachers use a range of pedagogies, such as inquiry-based, collaborative and experiential learning, to facilitate students' learning.

We are heartened that international benchmarking studies, like the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, have found that our primary school students are adept in reasoning, and applying concepts and skills to navigate non-routine situations and solve more complex problems.

Mr Speaker : Mr Dennis Tan.

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang) : Mr Speaker, I have two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. One, how does the Ministry ensure that inquiry-based and collaborative learning approaches are not only present in the curriculum, but meaningfully integrated into classroom practice across all schools, including those serving lower-income or higher needs communities?

My second supplementary question, has the Ministry recently conducted comparative studies of other primary school education systems, particularly, any that have successfully balanced academic rigour with creativity and collaborations, and what lessons, if any, have been drawn from these systems?

Dr Janil Puthucheary : Sir, I thank Mr Dennis Tan for the two questions. Indeed, collaboration and inquiry-based learning is integrated into all of the schools. These are core skillsets for our educators. This is something that our professionals as part of their training in the National Institute of Education, whether they are doing it as part of their original practicum or they go on to become specialists in particular areas of education.

These are core skillsets for our educators and they integrate them into the curriculum, into the syllabus on a regular basis; and they do so for every school and they give every child the opportunity to do so.

What collaborative learning, inquiry-based learning looks like will change, depending on whether it is talking about a mathematics class, a language class, a social studies class, and it will also change depending on the level of confidence and maturity of the students. What happens in the early primary years is going to look quite different from the later primary years.

And so, the core skillset to ensure that this type of pedagogy is available, used and integrated into our teaching methodologies, into all our classrooms, is there and is something that is at the heart of the teaching profession.

Sir, his second question was about studies of other systems. The short answer is yes, our educators are regularly and consistently looking at other education systems. There is a very robust community of practice amongst the educators within Singapore, and with our region and internationally. They are constantly and consistently comparing notes on a practical level, on a personal level. And there is also a robust community of practice in education research, which our educators and our education researchers participate in, and they are also comparing notes. So, we are always learning from one another.

To answer the second part of his second question, I think, would take me a Committee of Supply speech – to identify all the different components of pedagogy, learning methodology and faculty development. But I would assure Mr Tan and Members of the House that our education fraternity does not assume that we have solved all the problems, all the challenges within the education space, notwithstanding the ranking and grading, and external view, we have to consistently and regularly make sure that what we do in our schools and in our classrooms meets the needs, not just of the system, not just our general population of students, but the individual students that the educators hand-hold through their learning and development journey. That is an ongoing process.