How Did Schools Change for a New Nation?

In 1965 a quarter of the population was of school age, only 60% of people could read and write, and over 50,000 babies were born every year. The new nation needed young people with the values, skills and knowledge to earn a living and build the country. These notes explain three changes in schools: rapid expansion, education, and skills for industry.

The Challenge

An empty 1960s classroom with wooden desks and chairs, a blackboard and tall louvred windows — A 1960s classroom. Illustration drawn for Our Study Tribe.

Many children: in 1965, a quarter of the population was of school-going age.
Low literacy: only 60% of people could read and write.
More on the way: over 50,000 babies were born every year, all soon needing school places.
Not enough before: the colonial government had begun building schools in the early 1950s, but could not keep pace.

How Did Schools Change for a New Nation?

Change 1: More Schools and Teachers

PointSchools changed by expanding rapidly to provide a place for every child.
EvidenceDuring self-government and merger, about 83 new schools were built, around one a month, and within ten years the number of teachers almost doubled to over 19,000. Schools ran , one in the morning and one in the afternoon.
ElaborationRapid building and teacher training let the system keep pace with a fast-growing number of children, raising literacy and giving the next generation the basic education a modern economy required.
LinkHence, an expansion that began before 1965 became even more urgent after independence and laid the foundation for later changes.

Change 2: Two Languages for Everyone

PointSchools changed by giving every child a bilingual education.
EvidenceContinuing a policy first proposed in 1953, every student learned English and their mother tongue. English, which no main ethnic group could claim and which was used worldwide in business, became the common language, while the mother tongue preserved cultural roots; by the end of the 1960s the second language was a compulsory examination subject. From 1960, placed students with different first languages on one campus.
ElaborationA common, neutral language let students of different races communicate and prepared them for jobs with MNCs, while the mother tongue kept them connected to their heritage, so bilingualism served both national unity and the economy.
LinkThus, bilingual education helped build a united and employable population.

Change 3: Skills for Industry

PointSchools changed by equipping students with the skills industry needed.
EvidenceThere were more mathematics, science and technical subjects, and from 1969 all lower secondary boys and half the girls took subjects such as Woodwork and Technical Drawing. More technical teachers were trained and specialised technical schools set up. Primary education was free for all, and families were urged to send daughters as well as sons.
ElaborationA technically trained workforce kept Singapore attractive to MNCs, and educating girls as well as boys widened the pool of workers, allowing women to contribute to the economy.
LinkTherefore, schools were training workers and building the nation at the same time.

Looking Ahead: The Goh Report

Portrait photo of Dr Goh Keng Swee in 1967 — Dr Goh Keng Swee, 1967. Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

New needs: by the late 1970s, the education system had to change again to meet the needs of a developing economy and society.
The review: Deputy Prime Minister Dr Goh Keng Swee led a team that found too many students leaving school early and weak results in two languages.
The Goh Report, 1979: it recommended letting each child learn at a pace suited to their ability.

In One Sentence

Schools changed for the new nation by expanding rapidly, teaching every child English and a mother tongue, and equipping students with the skills industry needed.

Think About It

English was chosen as the common language partly because no main ethnic group could claim it. Why would that matter in a country with many races?
One boy's mother moved him from a Chinese school to an English school because she was told he needed English for a good job. Was that a sensible choice? What might he have lost or gained?
Why would a country trying to attract factories care so much about teaching maths, science and technical subjects?