SCHOOLS IN SINGAPORE: TYPES, CURRICULUM, LANGUAGE

SCHOOLS IN SINGAPORE

Springdale Primary School

Schooling is virtually free at government schools where all Singaporean children go. International schools are restricted to foreigners, with few exceptions. Singapore students are required to sit for major two exams — during primary school and after secondary school. The aim of many parents is to get their children into one of the top five junior colleges in Singapore — -Raffles, Hwa Chong, Victoria, National and Temasek—which are viewed as stepping stones to getting into a good university.

Singapore has approximately 335 schools under the supervision of the Ministry of Education (MOE), serving around 420,000 students at the primary and secondary levels. Across the entire education system—including universities, polytechnics, the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), junior colleges, and specialized institutions—the total student population exceeds 650,000. At the primary level, Singapore has about 177 primary schools enrolling approximately 235,000 students. Singapore has approximately 131 secondary schools serving around 162,000 students. [Source: Singapore’s Department of Statistics (SingStat), Data.gov.sg, and the Ministry of Education]

In 2003 Singapore had 175 schools, 299,993 students, and 12,025 teachers at the primary level and 162 schools, 206,426 students, and 10,830 teachers at the secondary level. At the postsecondary level, Singapore maintained two centralized institutes with 851 students and 103 teachers and 16 junior colleges with 23,708 students and 1,956 faculty members. Postsecondary education also includes Singapore Polytechnic, which in 2004–5 had 13,738 full-time students; the Institute of Technical Education with 21,796 students; and the National Institute of Education with 5,092 students. [Source: Library of Congress, 2006]

In 2006, primary and secondary school students totaled about 530,423, or 11.8 percent of the entire population. In 1996, there were 269,668 students 198 primary schools, with 10,618 teachers. The student-to-teacher ratiostood at 25 to 1. In 1996, secondary schools had 207,719 students and 10,354 teachers. The student-to-teacher ratio was 20:1. [Source: Worldmark Encyclopedia of Nations, Thomson Gale, 2007; [Source: Countries of the World and Their Leaders Yearbook 2009, 2008 Gale]

As of June 1987, there were 229 government and government-aided primary schools enrolling 266,501 students. Government-aided schools originally were private schools that, in return for government subsidies, taught the standard curriculum and employed teachers assigned by the Ministry of Education. There were 157 secondary schools and junior colleges, enrolling 201,125 students, and 18 vocational training schools, enrolling 27,000 students. The 15 junior colleges operating by late 1989 enrolled the "most promising" 25 percent of their age cohort and were equipped with computers, laboratories and well-stocked libraries. Some represented the elite private schools of the colonial period, with their ancient names, traditions, and networks of active alumni, and others were founded only in the 1980s, often in the centers of the housing estates. In 1989 the government was discussing the possibility of permitting some of the junior colleges to revert to private status, in the interest of encouraging educational excellence and diversity. [Source: Library of Congress, 1989]

School System in Singapore

The British-inspired education system includes six years of compulsory primary school, four years of secondary school, and two years of junior college for those aspiring to higher education. All children between age six and 14 are required to attend school, and school attendance in 2005 was almost universal at both primary and secondary levels. English is the primary medium of instruction. [Source: Library of Congress, 2006]

Primary schooling is available in all four official languages. Upon completing primary school, students can join the Vocational and Industrial Training Board to receive vocational training. Those who qualify can then undertake four or five years of secondary education, leading to two-year junior college courses or three-year pre-university courses at school centres. In the 1990s, fifteen vocational institutes offered training courses in the metalworking, woodworking, electrical, electronic, and building trades. [Source: Junior Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations, Thomson Gale, 2007]

Singapore has about 27 mixed-level and specialized institutions, including junior colleges, centralized institutes, integrated program schools, and specialized independent schools. Junior colleges prepare students for university entrance examinations and usually offer a two-year pre-university curriculum. Integrated Program schools allow selected students to bypass the O-Level examination and proceed directly to advanced studies. Specialized schools focus on areas such as mathematics, science, sports, or the arts and are intended to nurture particular talents and interests. These institutions form part of Singapore’s broader strategy of providing differentiated educational opportunities while maintaining high national standards. [Source: Singapore’s Department of Statistics (SingStat), Data.gov.sg, and the Ministry of Education]

Academic Performances Differences in Public and Private Schools in Singapore

Singapore’s education system combines strong government oversight with significant competition among schools. Most students attend government or government-supported schools, and the proportion attending government-dependent private schools changed little between 2018 and 2022. Public authorities continue to play a central role in curriculum design, teacher training and educational standards. [Source: OECD]

Academic performance differences between public and private schools in Singapore are relatively small once socio-economic factors are taken into account. Compared with many countries, attending a private school does not appear to provide a major academic advantage. This reflects the generally high quality of Singapore’s public education system and the standardized national curriculum used across schools.

Competition among schools is particularly strong in Singapore. More than 93 percent of students attended schools whose principals reported that they competed with at least two other nearby schools for student enrollment, one of the highest rates internationally. School choice, academic rankings and specialized programs all contribute to this competitive environment.

Very few schools operate without competition. Only a small percentage of students attended schools whose principals reported either one competing school or no competing schools nearby. This reflects Singapore’s dense urban environment and the large number of schools located within close proximity of one another.

The competitive school system is often credited with encouraging high standards and innovation, but it has also been criticized for contributing to academic pressure and stress among students and parents. Government reforms in recent years have attempted to reduce excessive competition by placing greater emphasis on holistic education, character development and student well-being alongside academic achievement.

School Curriculum in Singapore

The Singaporean government has mandated that English be the primary language used at all levels of the school systems. In line with the government policy on bilingualism, each child must learn two languages, English and a choice of one of the other official languages—Chinese, Malay, or Tamil. Thus, the multi-lingual aspect of Singapore is being preserved. [Source: Cities of the World, Gale Group Inc., 2002, adapted from a U.S. Department of State report; Countries of the World and Their Leaders Yearbook 2009, 2008 Gale]

In 1979. The Singapore government launched a campaign to promote Mandarin to unite under one language Singapore's disparate Chinese communities that spoke a multitude of dialects passed on by their ancestors who came from China in the 19th and early 20th century. Unifying the Chinese majority in a country with sizeable Malay and Indian minorities was a priority and in the early days the Speak Mandarin Campaign discouraged ethnic Chinese from speaking the dialects that prevailed such as Hokkien. [Source: Reuters]

The campaign to replace the Chinese "dialects" with Mandarin, called the "mother tongue,” was the most ambitious aspect of Singapore's language planning and attempted social engineering. The Speak Mandarin campaign began in 1979 as a PAP project and was subsequently institutionalized in the Mandarin Campaign Secretariat in the Ministry of Communications and Information. The promotion of Mandarin as a common Chinese language dates back to the early years of the century, when it was associated with the rise of Chinese nationalism and the foundation of Chinese schools. Learning Mandarin would, it was argued, permit all Chinese to communicate in their "mother tongue," be useful for doing business with China, and, perhaps most important, promote traditional Chinese values. [Source: Library of Congress, 1989 *]

Speak Mandarin and Language Learning in Singapore

All ethnic Chinese were required to study Mandarin through secondary school and to pass examinations in it for university admission. Chinese civil servants took a required 162-hour conversational Mandarin course, and the Mandarin Campaign Secretariat coordinated the annual Speak Mandarin campaigns. Mandarin classes were offered by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry and by some native-place and clan associations.

All Chinese television broadcasting was in Mandarin, as was most radio broadcasting. Radio programs in Chinese dialects were limited to 9:00 P.M. to midnight on the same station that broadcast Tamil from 5:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. In 1989 members of Parliament complained that some residents were tuning in to Cantonese opera broadcast by television stations in neighboring Malaysia. By late 1988, some 87 percent of the Chinese population claimed to be able to speak Mandarin. People did not agree, however, on the appropriate social contexts for use of what was for everyone a school language. As a result, people tended to use English or their native tongue on most everyday occasions. During the late 1980s, the Speak Mandarin campaign attempted to persuade people to use Mandarin when shopping and targeted taxi drivers, bus conductors, and operators of food stalls as workers who were to use Mandarin. [Source: Library of Congress *]

The goals of the Speak Mandarin campaign included improving communication between Chinese speech groups, teaching people to read Chinese, and promoting Confucianism. Some critics argued that children were expected to learn two foreign languages in school (English and Mandarin) and that for some students the result was fluency in neither. The official response was that the problem would be avoided if people would speak Mandarin at home. Some educators questioned whether a sufficient level of Chinese literacy could be achieved with the amount of time the schools devoted to Chinese, a point that was indirectly supported in August 1988 when Brigadier General Lee Hsien Loong, the minister for trade and industry and son of Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, urged Chinese newspapers to use simpler language to attract younger readers.

Some academics questioned the restriction of Chinese values to Confucianism and recalled that in the 1950s and early 1960s Chinese was the language of radicalism and revolt rather than of loyalty and conservatism. The necessity of learning Mandarin to conserve traditional Chinese culture was not obvious to those Chinese who felt that Chinese culture had been transmitted for centuries through Hokkien, Teochiu, and Cantonese. They pointed out that the colloquial speech of modern Beijing (upon which Mandarin is based) was as distant from the classical Chinese of the Confucian texts as was colloquial Cantonese. Giving up the dialects implied a major transformation of the social structure of the Chinese community, because the associational and commercial structure of Singapore's Chinese-oriented society rested on (and reinforced) dialect distinctions. *

Sara Webb and Richard Borsuk wrote in the Asian Wall Street Journal: The “Speak Mandarin campaign was meant to both unify Singapore's Chinese community and to further Singapore's business ties with mainland China, in recognition of China's importance in the region... But learning Mandarin proved quite a struggle for many Singaporeans, since it meant they had to study an extra language on top of English. [Source: Sara Webb And Richard Borsuk, Asian Wall Street Journal, May 1, 2000]

Concerns Over Learning Mandarin in Singapore Schools

Seah Chiang Nee wrote in The Star, “Setting it off was the Education Minister’s remarks that a lower weighting for the second language in primary schools was being considered. A segment of Chinese reacted with emotional disapproval, seeing it as a possible downgrading of their language in future. The government has firmly denied any intention to do away with bilingualism, which remains society’s cornerstone. But it said the mother tongue would be taught differently to cater for students with difficulties. These students number by the thousands, including many who are excellent in science and maths, who try as they may but just cannot cut the grade in the mother tongue. Most hail from predominantly English-speaking homes. [Source: Seah Chiang Nee, The Star, May 15, 2010 /*/]

“A few are brilliant scholars and definitely not lazy who end up being sent abroad to avoid failing in Chinese. About 60 percent of the Chinese and Indian kids who enter Primary One come from homes that speak English. The percentage for Malays is lower. Hardly any one of these children can do without additional private tuition, where fees are rising. The Government’s assurance came only after an outburst from many Chinese, especially the traditionalists, teachers, clan associations and Chinese media. /*/

“As the debate on mother tongue rages, some observers see a broader reason for the erosion of interest for learning the mother tongue among the young. As Singapore globalised, more and more of its youths embraced international values and Western norms. According to Dr Rujaya Abhakorn at Chiang Mai University, this trend also describes much of South-East Asia today. He blamed it on globalisation which was driving people to acquire language skills “not in many, but in one language – English, seen as the key to success in the globalised age”. /*/

“The rising disenchantment in Singapore stems from frustration at being forced to learn – often by memory – a language that they feel is less useful in preparing them for the new high-tech world. Although Singapore is predominantly Chinese, many young Chinese seem to be becoming more enamoured with Western or international values, than their own traditions. There is one big consolation, though. Few Singaporeans, if any at all, want bilingualism to end and most want the teaching of mother tongue to continue in order to preserve the culture. What they dislike is letting their future to be too dependent on Chinese grades. A friend who has operated a successful public relations firm told me: “For years I had laboured nightmarishly to pass Chinese with the help of tuition teachers. This knowledge is of little use to me now. Even in China, my clients usually insist on using English.” /*/

For thousands of students with difficulties the status quo of their present dilemma is intolerable. Their problem led to a lightening of their burden and exam pressure in a 2005 review. For example, 12 year-olds were allowed to bring the dictionary into the exam hall and use it. More emphasis was placed on reading and listening skills rather than on writing and memorising words and phrases. An explanation came from Lee (now Minister Mentor) last year when he apologised publicly for wrongly assuming that people could simultaneously learn two languages equally well. “Successive generations of students paid a heavy price, because of my ignorance by my insistence on bilingualism,” he said. /*/

Supporters of Learning Mandarin in Singapore Schools

Seah Chiang Nee wrote in The Star, “To put it in perspective, Mandarin remains widely used by the Chinese among themselves, more so than English. (Lee Kuan Yew, the then prime minister ended the use of dialects years ago). Some Chinese are fearful that any effort to lower the standard of teaching may lead to its erosion in the face of an increasingly English-speaking environment. A large rally was organised week for which the organiser explained online: “Mother-Tongue is as dear as mother, and should not be discarded (or) avoided. Avoidance will eventually lead to it being discarded.” [Source: Seah Chiang Nee, The Star, May 15, 2010 /*/]

“Under decades of bilingual education, society has virtually erased the distinction between Chinese and English-educated as in the past. This explained why some of the protesters were from English-speaking families, too. They feel that in simplifying learning, the Government is pandering to the whims of a minority of weak students. They do not want to see this international hub turn into a society without character that is neither Asian nor Western. /*/

“Economists are also concerned about the possible dilution of Mandarin in Singapore, where standards are already low, in the face of a powerful China. (A BBC programme said that by 2050, Chinese is forecast to become the second most powerful language next to English and its share of Internet content will rise to about 40 percent.) “Many Westerners are learning Chinese to seek opportunities there, so it is suicidal for us to drop it,” said a businessman. “One day our people may have to go to China to look for jobs.” /*/

Civics and Social Studies Curriculum in Singapore

Various civic and citizenship education programs have been launched in Singapore over time. In 1997, National Education was introduced in all Singaporean schools, with an agenda centering on a revitalized conception of nationalism and citizen loyalty in response to globalization. National Education is not taught as a separate subject in schools but is included in the school curriculum. It also comprises four core annual events, daily routines, and cocurricular activities in schools. [Source: Laney Zhang, Foreign Law Specialist, June 2020]

Currently, there are two subjects taught in Singapore schools that are closely associated with civic education: Character and Citizenship Education and Social Studies. Both subjects are required for all primary and secondary school students. The MOE maintains tight control over the national syllabi, textbooks, and assessments of these two subjects. |*|

The teaching of Social Studies was introduced at the primary level in 1981. In 2001, it was introduced at the upper secondary level as the major vehicle for National Education. The subject emphasizes understanding of national issues, organized around the National Education messages. Social studies is a compulsory subject for students who are 15 to 17 years of age and is tested in the national examinations. According to a 2013 article on Singapore’s citizenship curriculum, all primary sixth grade and secondary fourth grade or equivalent students must participate in and pass the National Education Quiz. |*|

Secondary School in Singapore

Secondary education offers a variety of academic pathways designed to match students’ interests, learning styles, and career goals. Recent reforms have gradually replaced the older streaming system with subject-based banding, allowing students to study different subjects at varying levels of difficulty. Secondary schools also place increasing emphasis on digital learning, applied education, leadership development, and extracurricular activities. Many schools offer specialized programs in science, mathematics, the arts, sports, and technology. [Source: Singapore’s Department of Statistics (SingStat), Data.gov.sg, and the Ministry of Education]

The cost of secondary education in Singapore is nominal, reflecting a system where the government actively promotes technical and vocational pathways to boost employment opportunities for the younger generation. To support this mission, the Vocational and Industrial Training Board (VITB) was established in 1979 to oversee vocational training alongside continuing education programs. Across its 15 training institutes, the VITB offers approximately 50 distinct courses to around 20,000 students, focusing on practical expertise in applied arts, commercial sectors, industrial environments, and service skills. [Source: Cities of the World, Gale Group Inc., 2002, adapted from a U.S. Department of State report; D. R. SarDesai, World Education Encyclopedia, Gale Group Inc., 2001]

Structurally, the first two years of the secondary school level are common to all students, who follow an identical curriculum. Upon completing these initial two years, individuals who wish to exit the regular academic track have the option to join industrial training centers or vocational institutes for specialized job training, allowing them to enter the labor market directly. For those who remain, the third and fourth years of secondary education introduce specialized tracks, splitting students into academic, technical, or business education streams.

After completing their General Certificate of Education (GCE) examinations, students can transition into pre-university education. This can be pursued either through a two-year course at a junior college or a three-year course at a centralized institute, with both pathways offering curriculum options in arts, science, commerce, or technology. At the conclusion of this pre-university cycle, students sit for the GCE "Advanced" or "A" Level examination, the results of which strictly dictate their eligibility for admission into institutions of higher learning.

By 1996, the secondary education landscape comprised 151 schools serving 185,324 students—consisting of 96,860 males and 88,464 females—supported by a teaching staff of 8,779, which included 3,174 males and 5,605 females. This institutional network was divided into various management models, dominated by 97 government-run schools catering to 118,687 students with 5,368 teachers, representing a standard teacher-student ratio of 1:21. The remainder of the sector included 26 government-aided schools with 29,744 students and 1,579 teachers, eight independent schools enrolling 11,257 students under 684 teachers, and two private schools with 598 students and 56 teachers.

A notable shift during this period was the rapid growth of "Autonomous" schools, a model introduced in 1994. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of these autonomous institutions tripled from six to 18, causing their student enrollment to surge to 25,038 and their teaching staff to grow to 1,092.

Singapore Schools in the 1990s: Teaching Kids to Think Independently but Not Rebelliously

At the Crescent Girls School, clean-cut teenagers in neat yellow shirts and navy blue skirts sit at computer terminals at the cybercafe in the canteen. In a sparkling new science lab, girls cluster around more terminals, researching the cardiovascular system. The teacher is hard to find. Unlike the schoolmarms of old Singapore, who rigidly stood at the front of the room, she moves from monitor to monitor, advising students. We are trying to encourage a less frontal approach to teaching, says Cheryl Ng, who heads Crescent's information-technology department. This is much more fun than the old way, says student Amanda Bae, 14, as her friends all nod, because we can pick up things at our own rate. [Source: Dorinda Elliott; With Mahlon Meyer, Newsweek. September 6, 1999 |=|]

“It's the makings of a revolution. Until recently, Singapore embraced the discipline-oriented, Confucian approach to governing its people and educating its children. Like a nanny, the government preached about everything from who should have children to how often to flush the toilet. Teachers lectured students on the right answer to every question. There was little room for debate. But two years ago Singapore's leaders saw a crisis heading their way: though Singaporeans were becoming proficient at manufacturing high-tech goods, few people seemed to know how to even think about creating new technologies. Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew worried that lack of creativity would prevent the country from joining the Information Age. He launched a reform program and, without even a hint of irony, instructed schools to start being more creative. |=|

“The paradox is almost comical: a government known for its lack of tolerance for dissent was almost ordering people to loosen up. With thick packets of directives on how to teach creativity, officials promoted methods like teamwork, brainstorming and problem-solving in the classroom, getting away from the idea that there is only one correct answer. The top-down approach is on its way out. We must get away from the idea that it is only the people at the top who should be thinking, and the job of everyone else to do as they are told, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said at a Conference of Thinking in 1997. The government aims to teach children to think independently — but not rebelliously. To some, it seems an iffy proposition. The minute you teach people to think for themselves, they're not going to think the way you want, says one leading businessman. |=|

“It won't happen overnight. Singapore's students are still stressed out. Streamlining education by providing better facilities for brighter kids winnows out the losers as early as the age of 12 and students struggle with a crushing workload. Students' schoolbags are so heavy that the government created a task force a few years ago to recommend ways to lighten the load. One suggestion: pack fewer pencils. Educators are planning to introduce exams based on American SATs, which test analysis rather than knowledge. Spending on education has risen more than 30 percent since 1992 to almost $3000 per secondary student. The government is investing $1.2 billion in computers; by 2002, classrooms will have one for every two students. |=|

“That's the easy part. We are good at transmitting knowledge of technology. But how do you match technology with opportunity? says Education Minister Teo Chee Hean. Educators and entrepreneurs have drawn up a plan to cut students' workload by 30 percent. The key thing is to make more time for our students, says Teo. Time to think and play, the government hopes, will help students one day develop into creative workers. |=|

“The aim, above all, is to raise economic competitiveness. The government has established five new programs with US universities — engineering with MIT, medicine with Johns Hopkins and management with Wharton, the University of Chicago and France's European Institute of Business Administration (Insead). Singapore hopes they will help spread innovative thinking to local schools, too, and wooed the universities aggressively. The University of Chicago considered setting up in Hong Kong until Singapore offered tax-free status and funding for start-up costs. |=|

“A year from now, Singaporean students will start studies in the University of Chicago's tile-roofed, Chinese courtyard house, carefully restored to its original ornate style. But inside, the classrooms will look exactly like the American business school. Small teams of students will brainstorm in intimate classrooms built to teach people how to think, says Bill Kooser, associate dean at Chicago's Graduate School of Business, not what to think. |=|

“Demand for the creative approach is burgeoning. Peter Low, a crusader for reform, teaches at primary schools, colleges and major corporations. In his classroom, earnest businessmen listen intently. Creativity's not just for the guy in RD, says Low, jabbing the air and cracking jokes throughout the class. He arranges marbles on a projector tray into a circle. The goal of our education has been to form our thoughts into a pattern, he says, scattering the marbles. Our goal is to try to come up with a pattern no one has ever seen before. |=|

“Those marbles could one day haunt Singapore's leaders, who have built the city-state's economy with a successful combination of development and authoritarian rule. Skeptics think tinkering with education just to create a more productive society is missing the point. This very economic definition of education [undermines] any real attempt at creativity and maximizing one's ability, says Chua Beng Huat, a sociologist at Singapore's National University. |=|

“Singaporeans say they don't want to lose the discipline that has helped their students shine. We want to become a knowledge-based economy, says Teo, the Education minister. Some people think that light only emerges when there is chaos. I don't think so. If we are completely uncontrolled, then we are not going to get ideas. Can the government produce creative thinkers who are also obedient? At Crescent School, the squeaky-clean girls jump to their feet respectfully when a visitor appears; embarrassed administrators wave to them to continue with their studies. Who knows, Singapore's future graduates may one day outgrow their nanny.” |=|

Reforming Singaporean Schools in the Early 2000s to Put Less Emphasis on Rote Learning

In 2001, Seah Chiang Nee wrote in The Star, “Singapore's pressure-cooker, rote-learning education system is being revamped to turn out workers who can compete in the world of ideas and technology. "Remaking itself" to avoid being overwhelmed by cheap, large economies like China and India is a phrase often heard - and taken seriously - in Singapore these days. To succeed, the republic has to discard many of its past low-risk policies that ranked obedience, efficiency and long working hours just as highly as the Japanese - with similar results. Singapore now wants its people to not only be engineers and scientists but gain entrepreneurial and creative skills, too - starting, of course, from the schools. [Source: Seah Chiang Nee, The Star, December 2, 2001 ]

“It is easier said than done. Standing in the way is a centuries-old mindset among parents and teachers who define a good student as an unquestioning, hard-working youth with top exam grades. He is someone who listens and does what the teacher says and sticks to a set programme of studies - no "ifs" and "buts."

“In recent years, Minister of Education Rear-Admiral Teo Chee Hean has been steadily making radical changes, adapting many of America's methods of promoting critical thinking in schools and universities. At this start of the 21st century, more fundamental changes are being considered — urgently. They range from doing away with "O" and "A" level exams for top students to allowing private schools to operate. Pre-university students may have to do more community service and original research work. There is already more emphasis on projects than on tests on memorising data.

“In university, more of its grading will be open, in which a student is tested on his ability to use - not memorise - data. In fact, 25 percent of entry scores will be based on America's SAT system with its emphasis on interpretative skills. Not well-versed enough with the new direction, parents are still putting pressure on their children "to study hard" - not read more, debate more or think more about creating things.

Madrassas (Muslim Schools) in Singapore

In the early 2000s, Singapore was home to six madrasahs (Islamic religious schools) serving around 4,000 students. Seah Chiang Nee noted in The Star that, “Unlike their radical peers in Pakistan or Indonesia, the madrasahs in Singapore do not teach anti-Americanism or hatred of infidels.” Instead, the institutions enforce strict discipline, gender segregation, and religious dress codes, all anchored by a curriculum heavy on moral instruction. Despite growing popularity—with 800 applicants competing for just 400 spots annually—many parents chose these schools to shelter their children from community social ills. One parent explained that families “besieged with drug-addict sons and runaway daughters” prioritize immediate moral grounding over sophisticated economic long views. [Source: Seah Chiang Nee, The Star, October 20, 2002]

Initially, critics and some Muslim parents worried that these privately run madrasahs offered a curriculum “tailored for a different age, with a lot of Arabic, religious studies and doctrinal content—hardly subjects that fit into a modern job.” Concerns mounted over a “very poor grounding in science, higher mathematics, biology and English,” exacerbated by a lack of proper labs and computers. Activist Zulfikar Mohamad Shariff revealed that the government originally wanted to scrap primary madrasahs entirely, but compromised after parents feared it would destroy secondary school enrollment. Under this compromise, primary madrasahs remained open but were mandated to meet minimum educational standards on the Primary School Leaving Examination, facing closure if they failed for three consecutive years.

The Singapore government’s ultimate goal was to provide aid and supervision so these schools could “produce qualified religious teachers and fulfil the needs of the Muslim community” while meeting national standards in math, science, and English. This push was heavily influenced by a desire to “nip any potential security threat in the bud” amid rising regional extremism, mirroring Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's warnings that splitting knowledge into secular and religious spheres would keep Muslims in the “modern equivalent of the Dark Ages.” By 2009, institutions like Madrasah Al-Irsyad Al-Islamiah responded by upgrading to a high-tech environment. This modern campus featured touch-screen interactive blackboards, student polling devices, school-wide broadband, and MP3 players to ease the heavy academic burden of their extended school days. [Source: AFP, February 17, 2009]

Despite these technological advancements, the dual curriculum of both secular and religious subjects continues to polarize Singapore’s minority Muslim community, who comprise about 14 percent of the resident population. Some parents remain reluctant to enroll their children, fearing the intense workload crowds out vital holistic experiences. As parent Juliana Buono noted, “I believe a secular school gives more exposure to other cultures and gives (my son) more opportunities to explore other endeavours” like sports and art. Conversely, supporters emphasize the protective environment these schools provide against negative societal pressures. Former student Mariam Sulaiman, who went on to study biological sciences at a local university, recalled that “when you're in a madrasah, there is a lesser chance for you to mix around with bad influences like drugs and gangs.”

The ultimate objective of these six institutions has shifted toward cultivating elite spiritual guides rather than catering to the general populace. Al-Irsyad chairman Razak Mohamed Lazim clarified, “We are here not to provide academic education alone to the general public. We are here to develop potential religious leaders.” He openly blessed students who chose to transition into national secular schools for higher education, a path chosen by many teenagers who wish to broaden their horizons. For instance, a 16-year-old student named Nurlidyana expressed a desire to “explore more, open up, understand the world instead of just the Muslim world” after finishing her secondary studies.

Ultimately, this specialized, high-tech blend of academic and spiritual education has turned Singapore's system into an international benchmark for progressive Islamic schooling. Visitors from neighboring regions, including southern Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia, have traveled to Singapore to study this "progressive madrassa model." According to Razak, Indonesia went so far as to open two madrasahs modeled directly after Al-Irsyad, taking their system, curriculum, and teacher training "lock, stock and barrel." For the students who remain, the experience provides an irreplaceable foundation, as Nurlidyana and her classmates concluded that the madrasah uniquely “allows us to learn the guidelines on how to be a good Muslim.”

Image Sources: Wikimedia Commons, Singapore Ministry of Education

Text Sources: “Encyclopedia of World Cultures Volume 5: East/Southeast Asia:” edited by Paul Hockings; 1993; New York Times; Washington Post; Los Angeles Times; Smithsonian magazine; Encyclopedia.com; National Geographic; Live Science; Malaysia Tourism websites; Malaysia government websites; UNESCO; Metropolitan Museum of Art; Natural History magazine; Times of London; Library of Congress; The Conversation; The New Yorker; Time; BBC; CNN; Reuters; Associated Press; AFP; Lonely Planet Guides; Google AI; Wikipedia; The Guardian and various websites; books and other publications.

Last updated May 2026