.png)
In this Explainer, find out...
What is the Gifted Education Programme (GEP)?
What changes have been made to the GEP, and why?
What are the potential impacts of these changes?
Introduction
Amid the intense pressure of Singapore’s world-class education system, calls for more support across the academic playing field are slowly but surely being answered. Recognising that every child has different abilities, Prime Minister (PM) Lawrence Wong stressed in the most recent National Day Rally the importance of supporting all students, not just the early bloomers and high achievers — “Whatever the start points, we will help everyone to learn, develop and grow, and realise your full potential.”
This appeal for greater inclusivity has paved the way for a major overhaul to the GEP, first introduced in 1984 as a programme specifically designed for intellectually gifted students representing the top one per cent of their cohorts. However, the GEP is set to be discontinued in its current form. Changes to the GEP aim to broaden its scope, allowing more students to benefit from opportunities that challenge them according to their strengths. At the same time, these changes address broader concerns about pressure and fairness within the education system.
This Policy Explainer will outline the changes made to the GEP and the rationale behind them. More importantly, it aims to assess the potential impacts of these changes. In doing so, we might better evaluate Singapore’s progress towards providing more equitable support to students.
The GEP in its Current Form
The GEP is a programme focused on developing the academic potential of intellectually gifted students. It admits about one per cent of the Singapore cohort, or 400 to 500 students each year.
How are Students Selected for the GEP?
In Primary Three, students in MOE primary schools undergo a two-stage exercise that tests their English, Mathematics and general abilities. Those who succeed are placed in one of nine selected schools in Primary Four: Anglo-Chinese School (Primary), Catholic High School (Primary), Henry Park Primary School, Nan Hua Primary School, Nanyang Primary School, Raffles Girls’ Primary School, Rosyth School, St Hilda’s Primary School or Tao Nan School.
What is the GEP curriculum currently like?
The GEP curriculum in these selected schools is standardised and enriched to meet the needs of high-ability students.
While specialised, the GEP curriculum is based primarily on the regular curriculum and differentiated into these four areas:
Content Enrichment: Extends beyond the basic syllabus, making connections between subjects and investigating real-life problems;
Process Enrichment: Provides opportunities for discovery and experiential learning through research projects, varied teaching methods and small group activities;
Product Enrichment: Encourages creative expression and opportunities for student-initiated community projects; and
Learning Environment: Provides out-of-school experiences and mentorship attachments.
High-Ability Learner Programmes
However, the GEP is set to be discontinued in its current form. The batch of Primary One students admitted in 2024 will experience a complete transition to Higher-Ability Learner (HAL) programmes in 2026.
Originally introduced in 2007, HAL programmes will be expanded to take in 10 per cent of all primary school pupils, up from seven per cent today. HAL programmes (see Figure 1) are currently managed and implemented by the Gifted Education Branch (GEB) or by individual schools, targeting students who are talented in specific areas of a subject.
Figure 1: Existing HAL Programmes
English Language Programmes | Mathematics and Science Programmes |
Wits & Words: Inter-school Debate Championship | Primary Mathematics Project Competition |
Creative Writing Programme (CWP) | E2K Mathematics Programme |
Reading Circles (RC) | E2K Science Programme |
These changes seek to establish a more holistic talent identification process, create multiple junctures for talent identification and development, and nurture a stable learning environment.
A More Holistic Talent Identification Process
To determine their eligibility for HAL programmes, Primary Three students will still take a test similar to the first stage of the GEP selection process, which tests for English and Mathematics. However, the second stage which tests English, Mathematics and general abilities, will be removed.
Following this, schools will have the flexibility to decide how they identify high-ability learners (HALs) through subject-specific assessments. Further, a more holistic identification process will be encouraged, incorporating factors such as teachers’ observations and students’ day-to-day work.
Democratising Higher-Ability Education
As PM Lawrence Wong highlighted in the 2024 National Day Rally, there has to be a shift away from the one-dimensional approach of teaching to the average — “Compared with many years ago, when we were very focused on traditional skills like mathematics and languages, nowadays we value multiple talents, multiple passions, and we want to help everyone realise their full potential.”
Previously under the GEP, one had to demonstrate proficiency across all three assessed areas — English, Mathematics and general abilities — to be admitted. Under the new system, a more targeted approach will be adopted, where students will gain entry into HAL programmes as long as they excel in any area (see Figure 2). As such, HALs will be relieved from the undue stress of expectations to be “gifted” in all subjects.
By broadening the dimensions of learning, parents and teachers are also encouraged to nurture positive learning attitudes and work ethics among students, helping them demonstrate their potential to excel in HAL programmes.
Multiple Junctures for Talent Identification and Development
Students will now have the flexibility to enter or exit HAL programmes at multiple points between Primary Four and Primary Six, rather than being selected solely based on the two standardised GEP tests in Primary Three.
Nurturing Academic Growth
As Minister for Education Chan Chun Sing stressed in an August 2024 media briefing, “A child manifests his abilities across time, rather than at a single point.” Providing the freedom to enter or exit HAL programmes at multiple points prevents schools from reducing students to their early labels.
This change also alleviates the pressure on parents to ‘hothouse’ their children — excessively pushing them to achieve advanced standards at a younger age than usual for entry into the GEP in Primary Four. Thus, students can thrive in a less stressful environment, allowing them to develop naturally during their academic journey.
A Stable Learning Environment
All primary schools will now be equipped to identify HALs and run HAL programmes for them. This means that students will no longer have to transfer to schools offering the GEP, and will continue at their current schools under their HAL programmes. If school-based HAL programmes are still insufficiently engaging, students can be further stretched by participating in after-school enrichment modules in specific subjects at designated nearby schools.
Encouraging Social Mixing
Instead of being uprooted and placed in an entirely new environment, students will benefit from a more stable learning environment that preserves the friendships and bonds they have built.
Surrounded by their peers, HALs can interact more frequently with students from all educational backgrounds, rather than being confined to classrooms filled solely with GEP students. This integration fosters diversity in learning experiences, encouraging HALs to grow both academically and socially.
Potential Impacts of the New HAL Programmes
While responses to the new HAL programmes have been largely positive, a few concerns have been raised regarding its potential impacts on various stakeholders.
Limiting the Potential of Gifted Students
During its inception, the GEP was designed to nurture intellectually gifted students to their fullest potential, as these children “thrived on a high degree of intellectual stimulation and may become mediocre, indifferent, or disruptive in class when their learning needs were unmet.”
Yet, with the expanded accommodation of HAL programmes, MOE has conceded that this may reduce the intensity of enrichment for its students. Parents stress that gifted students have minute yet important differences from other HALs. Thus, lowering the academic rigour of these programmes may result in insufficient intellectual stimulation, which fails to meet the psychological and educational needs of gifted children.
When asked about the concerns raised by such parents, the MOE has stated that “the new approach [to high-ability students] does not seek to replicate the existing GEP.” As such, to address the concerns of limiting the potential of gifted students, it is important to acknowledge the redefined focus of the HAL programmes — to develop students with higher abilities in specific areas instead of focusing solely on gifted students.
Further, gifted students who require further academic stimulation may attend after-school enrichment modules in specific subjects, allowing them to continue receiving an education that fulfils their learning needs. Still, the need for gifted students to participate in after-school enrichment to attain sufficient intellectual stimulation may unintentionally convey a narrative that Singapore penalises students for their success. For achieving academic success, gifted students must now extend their schooling hours should they desire to receive an education suited to their intellectual needs. In an attempt to cater to a greater pool of students, parents claim that the new HAL programmes may have disadvantaged the gifted students they were originally intended to serve.
Lack of Skilled Teachers and Equipment
Expanding the new HAL programmes to every primary school in Singapore is challenging to execute due to the shortage of skilled manpower.
Currently, teachers specialised in providing gifted education represent a minority, as they consist of a small group of professionals within nine primary schools. With more than 180 primary schools in Singapore now expected to offer school-based HAL programmes by 2027, the number of teachers with the necessary skills and materials must increase rapidly.
To address this concern, MOE stated that they have been building manpower capacity and training materials over the years, and will deploy the expertise of the nine current GEP schools to train more teachers to provide higher-ability education.
Separately, while all primary schools in Singapore will provide school-based HAL programmes, differences in quality are inevitable. Schools that can allocate more resources to developing their HAL programmes will likely have more engaging curricula, which may motivate more parents to admit their children into such schools to receive higher-quality education.
While the revamped HAL programmes may discourage students from switching schools, it may cause further inequities in attaining higher-ability education. As affluent parents tend to be better able to send their children to their desired schools, this disproportionately increases their chances of receiving a higher quality of education. Ultimately, differences in the skill and quality of manpower may undermine the democratisation of higher-ability education that the new HAL programmes intend to achieve.
Balancing Perspectives
Singapore’s move towards creating a more inclusive and holistic education environment is commendable. Nevertheless, the phasing out of the GEP and its expansion to include more students under the HAL programmes must be carefully managed. While it aims to reduce the focus on academic labels, there is a risk that valuable achievements may not be adequately recognised. If success becomes harder to quantify, parents and students themselves might even struggle to appreciate and celebrate important milestones in their own learning journeys.
The ‘Crabs in Buckets’ Phenomenon
In the worst-case scenario, academic success could be downplayed to the extent that it is met with criticism, envy, disdain, or distrust.
A popular metaphor about the behaviour of crabs in an open bucket accurately captures such attitudes. Whenever one crab climbs near the top of the bucket to escape, another crab will grab onto it, pulling it back down. Both crabs inevitably fall back to the bottom of the bucket. The phrase ‘crabs in buckets’ thus describes a situation where members of a group undermine any member who tries to succeed. Such a culture keeps everyone performing at the status quo, stifling the potential of more capable individuals who can punch above mediocrity.
Celebrating Success
However, Singapore’s continued success depends on a society that consistently strives for excellence and pushes boundaries. Since schools are foundational institutes that play a vital role in shaping young minds, they must avoid fostering a mindset where academic success is something to be ashamed of and hidden away. Through giving recognition where it is deserved, schools should instead encourage students to be proud of their achievements.
While celebrating success might feel discomforting for some, it should never reach a point where students fear harsh judgement for their achievements. For years, the GEP has been a cornerstone of recognising exceptional talent and providing specialised pathways for gifted students. Where talented individuals were previously selected and nurtured for their potential, attempts to reduce distinctions might unintentionally foster a ‘crabs in buckets’ culture, where others pull them down out of spite or envy. This not only hinders their academic progress but also erodes their self-esteem. The lack of confidence might then limit their ability to achieve greater things in future.
To preserve the best of what the GEP once represented, it is thus crucial that schools celebrate success without introducing unhealthy comparisons among students. When broadening success to include practical skills and interpersonal abilities beyond academics, it can also be seen as a shared experience, not just an individual achievement. This mindset encourages students to work hard for their personal best while also learning to be genuinely happy for the accomplishments of others.
Conclusion
Formative learning environments often shape how we define success throughout life, significantly affecting our mental well-being long beyond our school years. Recognising this, the gradual shift from divisive labels and programmes to more inclusive talent-identification processes seeks to create a healthier relationship between students and learning.
Yet changes to the current GEP are but a piece of an intricate puzzle within Singapore’s education system. Not only is the input of policymakers required for attitudes to change, but also the openness of students, parents, teachers and society as a whole to new definitions of success. This, however, does not mean lowering standards or condemning success. As a society founded on excellence, Singaporeans should always strive to do their best, but not be too harsh on themselves when falling short of expectations. What matters most is that they have given their all — that alone is worthy of celebration.
This Policy Explainer was written by members of MAJU. MAJU is an independent, youth-led organisation that focuses on engaging Singaporean youths in a long-term research process to guide them in jointly formulating policy ideas of their own.
By sharing our unique youth perspectives, MAJU hopes to contribute to the policymaking discourse and future of Singapore.
The citations to our Policy Explainers can be found in the PDF appended to this webpage.
Comments