Final report of the Commission of Inquiry into Education

On 13 March 1962, a nine-man commission, chaired by then acting vice-chancellor of the University of Singapore (now National University of Singapore), Lim Tay Boh, was appointed to study the government’s education policy, its content and administration in all fields except vocational and technical education, and make recommendations.^[1] The commission submitted an interim report reviewing the effectiveness of the six-day week for schools on 6 July 1962, followed by a final report on 28 August 1963.^[2] The final report addressed many aspects of education in Singapore, including the structure of the school system; curriculum; methods of instruction; teaching of languages, science, mathematics and history; as well as the supply and training of teachers and other matters.

In the report, the commission proposed that the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) be changed to a certificate examination in order to effectively assess the progress of pupils after six years of primary education.^[3] It would double up as a selection examination to channel pupils into different courses at the secondary schools according to their interests and abilities.^[4] To that end, the commission suggested that five passing grades, ranging from “A” to “E” with grade “F” for failures, be awarded on the examination of each subject.^[5] It was also necessary to reorganise the curriculum to offer continuing secondary school education in commercial, technical or vocational subjects for pupils who were less academically-inclined.^[6]

Other recommendations that the commission made were to considerably revise and reduce the primary and secondary syllabuses to align with the capabilities of pupils as well as the time available for study, particularly in the teaching of history.^[7] To raise second language proficiency among pupils, the commission recommended greater emphasis on the spoken, functional and practical aspects of the language, as well as the training of special language teachers, especially for Malay.^[8]

In general, the commission found wide variations in school standards and attributed this to the shortage of well-qualified and experienced teachers and high turnover rates.^[9] Another recommendation by the commission in this regard was the introduction of an in-service training scheme for teachers to ensure they kept up with the latest methods of instruction and that audio-visual aids should be tested in demonstration or experimental classes at the Teachers’ Training College or University of Singapore School of Education before being introduced to schools.^[10] In addition, the commission also highlighted the need to improve the conditions of the teaching service and salaries in order to attract and retain more graduate teachers.^[11]

References
1. Professor Lim to head probe on education. (1962, March 14). The Straits Times, p. 18. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
2. Lim, T-B. & Commission of Inquiry into Education. (1964). Commission of Inquiry into Education Singapore Final Report. (pp. x–xi). Singapore: Government Printers. Call no.: RCLOS 370.95957 SIN
3. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, p. 26.
4. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, p. 26.
5. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, p. 26; ‘New deal’ for secondary education here. (1964, April 11). The Straits Times, p. 8. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
6. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, p. 18.
7. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, pp. 27, 33–35.; The Straits Times, 11 Apr 1964, p. 8.
8. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, pp. 47–49. ; The Straits Times, 11 Apr 1964, p. 8.
9. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, pp. 16–17.
10. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, pp. 38, 40–41; Commission recommends in-service training plan for teachers. (1964, April 13). The Straits Times, p. 12. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
11. Lim & Commission of Inquiry into Education, 1964, p. 84.