Forum: Large class sizes are a matter of economics

As a former Ministry of Education teacher who now runs his own tuition centre, I’ve come to see class size through a clearer, less idealistic lens (

Class sizes matter as teaching workload changes, say Singapore teachers

, Dec 13).

Large class sizes are not a pedagogical choice. They are an economic design decision.

Smaller classes require significantly higher recurrent spending. More teachers, more classrooms, more long-term wage commitments. From a government perspective, that money has an opportunity cost.

The same resources could be channelled into other ministries and sectors that have a more direct and measurable impact on national productivity and gross domestic product growth.

There is also a manpower consideration. Aggressively reducing class sizes would mean absorbing more high-ability graduates into teaching, which in turn reduces the talent pool available to other industries the Government is actively trying to grow.

Viewed from this macro lens, the current system delivers outcomes that are considered “good enough”. Students are broadly literate, numerate and employable. Examination results remain stable. Social order is maintained.

From a policy standpoint, there is little incentive to fundamentally change a model that meets baseline objectives at a controlled cost.

This does not mean pedagogy is unimportant. It means pedagogy operates within economic constraints, not above them.

Understanding this distinction matters, because it explains why class sizes have remained largely unchanged for decades, and why meaningful reform in this area is unlikely without a major shift in national priorities.

Daniel Tay Xiong Sheng