Huan, Vivien Swee Leng

Character, citizenship, and values are areas of education that have received increasing attention in the international community. This is also the case for Singapore (Lee, 2012) with an education system guided by the student-centric, values-driven philosophy (Ministry of Education [MOE], 2011, 2012). In his speech at the 2011 MOE Work Plan Seminar, Singapore’s Minister for Education at that time, Mr. Heng Swee Keat, highlighted, “We need to develop our children holistically, in all aspects – moral, cognitive, physical, social and aesthetic or what is termed in Chinese as 德智体群美 (de zhi ti qun mei)” (MOE, 2011, para. 16) and that, “… between academic achievement and values, it must not be “either/or”. We should strive to achieve both” (MOE, 2011, para. 53).
An important out-of-classroom experience recognised to play an important role in holistic development, character building, and 21st century skills and competencies is co-curricular activities (CCAs; Chong-Mok, 2010; MOE, 2010, 2011; Schwarz & Stolow, 2006). In Singapore, CCAs are an integral part of school curriculum and proposed to offer an authentic platform for (a) development of moral values, (b) acquisition and practice of soft skills, (c) social integration of children from differing backgrounds and ethnicities, (d) provision of safe learning environment, (e) opportunities for character and leadership development, and (f) lifelong pursuit of interests and greater outward expression (Chong-Mok, 2010; MOE, 2011). While participation in CCAs during primary education is not compulsory, CCAs are emphasized in secondary schools and categorized into Core (or Main) and Merit (or Secondary/Optional) CCAs. Core CCAs are mandatory for all students, whereas Merit CCAs are offered as an option for students with an interest in a particular CCA area. In both primary and secondary levels, the range of CCAs offered is categorized into four major groups: Physical Sports, Uniformed Groups, Visual and Performing Arts, and Clubs and Societies. With the increased investment in CCAs in Singapore schools (MOE, 2011, 2012), there is a priority to examine the potential impacts of CCAs on the holistic development of Singaporean students. This study was a timely response to this call.

This paper describes a preschool inclusion initiative in Singapore, which currently has no mandate for integrating children with special needs in mainstream schools. This very small-scale qualitative study involving children with mild learning disabilities discusses a therapy outreach programme by a local children’s hospital. It explores the supports and challenges of this experience based on interviews with therapists, teachers, principals, and parents. Facilitators of inclusion included communication, collaboration, availability of training and resources, and a readiness for inclusion. Barriers to inclusion included person-related hindrances, structural obstacles, gaps in program delivery, and limited specialized training and resources. We learned that in the absence of mandatory provisions for inclusion, children with special needs can be supported in regular education when there is “buy in” for early inclusion and intervention amongst key stakeholders. Practical strategies toward this end are discussed.

This paper presents findings of a preliminary pilot study that was undertaken to examine what the perceptions of adolescents are, with regards to 3 different methods of disciplinary measures, namely peer mediation, responsible thinking, and corporal punishment, that are being carried out presently, in Singapore schools. This study intends to find out whether these discipline measures are being perceived to be effective approaches in addressing discipline problems by the adolescents. Using 3 short vignettes and a survey with rating scales, the subjects of this study, which comprised 30 secondary three girls and 35 secondary three boys, responded to the statements in the survey. Their perceptions towards each disciplinary measure were analysed. Findings of the study revealed only significant differences between the mean score for the corporal punishment disciplinary measure and that of the other 2 disciplinary measures namely peer mediation and responsible thinking. However, no significant difference was found between the mean scores of the peer mediation disciplinary measure and that of the responsible thinking disciplinary measure.

Moffitt’s theory of delinquency suggests that at-risk youths can be divided into two groups, the adolescence- limited group and the life-course- persistent group, predetermined at a young age, and social interactions between these two groups become important during the adolescent years. We built an agent-based model based on the microscopic interactions Moffitt described: (i) a maturity gap that dictates (ii) the cost and reward of antisocial behavior, and (iii) agents imitating the antisocial behaviors of others more successful than themselves, to find indeed the two groups emerging in our simulations. Moreover, through an intervention simulation where we moved selected agents from one social network to another, we also found that the social network plays an important role in shaping the life course outcome.

The study aims to provide an insider perspective of inclusion in Singapore primary schools. Two hundred educators were interviewed about their perceptions and experiences of inclusion. Findings shed light on the definition and implementation of inclusion, teachers’ personal experience, perceived barriers to and facilitators of to inclusion, and its advantages and disadvantages. Inclusion as currently practised in Singapore is an integration pull-out model. Teachers shared slightly more negative than positive experiences and provided valuable insights into the challenges and rewards of inclusion. Teacher attitude, a critical factor for successful inclusion, is related to perceived school support. More than training, teachers need to experience success. There are implications for school leadership, training, class allocation for special needs, and assessment.

This study used Latent Class Analysis (LCA) to examine whether multiple subgroups can be identified based on rule-breaking and aggressive behavior in school-based and at-risk adolescent samples. These groups were tested for differences in behavioral, emotional, personality and interpersonal correlates. Rule breaking and aggressive behavior co-occurred across all classes. School-based adolescents were classified as having minimal, minor or moderate antisocial problems. At-risk adolescents were classified as having mild, medium or severe antisocial problems. Generally, at-risk adolescents had higher levels of antisocial behavior, and greater severity of antisocial behavior was associated with more problems in various domains. Results differed however, for the school-based and at-risk samples with respect to emotional problems, sensation-seeking and peer conformity pressure. There is a need to jointly consider both non-aggressive rule-breaking behavior and aggressive behavior in prevention and intervention work, as it is insufficient to address isolated symptoms and problems in children and adolescents/