the secondary school food and consumer education (fce … · the secondary school food and consumer...
TRANSCRIPT
THE SECONDARY SCHOOL FOOD AND CONSUMER EDUCATION (FCE)
CURRICULUM IN SINGAPORE: HISTORY, CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS,
AND KEY ISSUES AND CONCERNS OF FCE TEACHERS
ONG Chiew Inn
BAppSc (FoodSc&Nutr), MEd (Hons)
This thesis is presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education of The University of Western Australia
Graduate School of Education
2017
ii
DECLARATION I, Ong Chiew Inn, certify that:
This thesis has been substantially accomplished during enrolment in the degree.
This thesis does not contain material which has been accepted for the award of any
other degree or diploma in my name, in any university or other tertiary institution.
No part of this work will, in the future, be used in a submission in my name, for any
other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the
prior approval of The University of Western Australia and where applicable, any
partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree.
This thesis does not contain any material previously published or written by another
person, except where due reference has been made in the text.
The work(s) are not in any way a violation or infringement of any copyright,
trademark, patent, or other rights whatsoever of any person.
The research involving human data reported in this thesis was assessed and approved
by The University of Western Australia Human Research Ethnic Committee.
Approval number: RA/4/1/6344
This thesis does not contain work that I have published, nor work under review for
publication.
Signature: Date: November 2017
iii
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to develop understandings of Home Economics education
in Singapore, involving the goals and direction of the curriculum over time, the
nature and extent of change, the catalysts for curriculum transformation, and the
experiences and viewpoints of teachers delivering the curriculum in the schools. The
rationale for this study was that future curriculum design and implementation would
benefit from having this history made available and from teacher insights on
curriculum delivery. The secondary school Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore has undergone dramatic transformations since Independence in 1965 to
the present day, yet prior to this study this history of change and development had
not been fully documented or analysed. Equally, prior to this study, there was very
limited information on teachers’ issues and concerns in delivering of the curriculum.
This study was designed to be carried out in two stages. The first stage examined the
history of the curriculum from 1965 to the design of the 2014 curriculum, the current
curriculum at the time of writing. Syllabi and other documents, and interview
transcripts from discussions with former curriculum designers and teachers were the
foundation for the development of the history. The second stage employed an
interpretivist approach to understand the participants’ perspectives, whereby focus
and individual interviews were undertaken with 18 beginning and experienced Home
Economics teachers from nine different secondary schools to understand their issues
and concerns in delivering the current (2014) curriculum. The data collected was
analysed using the approaches of content analysis and the Miles and Huberman
Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis.
iv
A key finding of the first stage of the study was that curriculum design has been
generally progressive and evolutionary, moving from a narrow client, skills and
knowledge base model to a more inclusive, complex, outward and ‘worldly’ model.
The reasons found for this dynamic and forward development were that curriculum
design has been particularly and very consistently responsive to international
educational developments and Singapore’s social, economic, educational and
political needs. In the second stage of the study, the investigation into teachers’
perspectives on curriculum implementation found major challenges relating to the
following areas: aims and objectives of the curriculum; structure and content of the
syllabus; delivery of lessons; assessment of learning; teachers’ competency and
training; organisational communication practices; and status and perception of
subject Home Economics. The thesis addressed these challenges with
recommendations on curriculum, practice and policy.
This study contributed to policy and practice by identifying the key drivers of Home
Economics curriculum design, by providing future curriculum design with a history
to build from, including goals and directions, and by providing teacher insights on
priorities and challenges in curriculum implementation. The study addressed the
absence of research in the area of Home Economics education in Singapore, by
offering a comprehensive description and analysis on the current situation in the
development and implementation of the Home Economics curriculum, and by
providing a valuable framework for those who wish to engage in further
critique/studies relating to the teaching and learning of Home Economics in schools.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Doctor David Pyvis, for
his guidance and support in the completion of this study. His meticulous and
constructive feedback has been invaluable in the progress of my writing. I am most
grateful for his infinite patience, understanding and encouragement over the past years. It
has been a privilege and rewarding experience to work with him.
I wish to acknowledge the valuable contributions and wonderful support from the
interview respondents, who gave up their time generously and imparted enormous detail.
Without the information they shared, this study would not have been possible.
Finally, I wish to extend my heartfelt thanks to all my lecturers in the Doctor of
Education programme. I would also like to thank Mr Joseph Tan, Ms Janet Edwards and
Ms Penny Vincent for their assistance throughout the programme.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Declaration ii
Abstract iii
Acknowledgements v
Table of Contents vi
List of Figures xv
List of Tables xvii
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms xviii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction 1
Background and Context 2
Australia 3
Hong Kong 4
Japan 5
Singapore 6
Definition of Concepts 8
Originality and Significance 10
Overview of the Literature 12
Theoretical perspectives of the Home Economics curriculum 12
Teaching/Learning in Home Economics education 14
Home Economics teachers’ perspectives on curriculum/delivery 14
Overview of Research Methodology 15
Research questions 17
vii
Theoretical framework 19
Selection of participants 20
Data collection 21
Data analysis 23
Overview of Findings of the Study 24
Structure of the Thesis 27
CHAPTER TWO: BACKGORUND AND CONTEXT
The International Context of Home Economics Education 30
International interpretations of Home Economics 31
International history and trends in Home Economics education 34
Home Economics as a Science 34
Home Economics as ‘literacy for the 21st Century’ 37
Home Economics Education in the Asia-Pacific Region 40
Home Economics education in Australia 40
Home Economics education in Hong Kong 43
Home Economics education in Japan 46
Home Economics Education in Singapore 48
The education system in Singapore 48
An overview 48
Secondary school education and types of secondary schools 52
Contemporary Home Economics education 58
The curriculum 58
Training of teachers 63
Conclusion 65
viii
CHAPTER THREE: LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical Perspectives of the Home Economics Curriculum 68
The concept of ‘curriculum’ 68
Conceptualising the Home Economics curriculum 71
Curriculum design 71
Curriculum delivery 75
Assessment of learning 78
Home Economics and feminism 80
Teaching/Learning in Home Economics Education 81
Home Economics Teachers’ Perspectives on Curriculum/Delivery 96
Conclusion 102
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Questions 104
Research Design 106
Theoretical framework 109
Historical research 109
Interpretivist research 111
Sample and Sampling Strategy 114
Data Collection 117
Document study 117
Interviews 120
Data Analysis 124
Content analysis 124
Miles and Huberman Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis 130
ix
Trustworthiness of the Study 134
Ethical Issues 136
Conclusion 137
CHAPTER FIVE: HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HOME
ECONOMICS CURRICULUM
First Phase: 1965-1980 142
1965: Domestic Science was offered to all girls in primary and 142
lower secondary level
1969: Domestic Science restricted to 50% of lower secondary 144
girls
1970: Domestic Science renamed as Home Economics 147
1977: Girls given uncurbed choice to study Home Economics 148
or Technical Studies
1979: Implementation of the New Education System (NES) 150
1980: A new Home Economics syllabus was issued due to the 151
NES and changing needs
Second Phase: 1981-1985 156
1984: Declaration of compulsory Home Economics for all lower 156
secondary girls
1985: A revised Home Economics syllabus catering to the new 159
policy was implemented
Third Phase: 1986-1994 163
1991: Declaration of compulsory Home Economics for all lower 163
lower secondary girls and boys from 1994
x
1994: A revised Home Economics syllabus catering to both girls 166
and boys was implemented
Fourth Phase: 1995-1999 170
1997: Three new education initiatives were launched by the 170
MOE
1999: A transitional Home Economics syllabus with reduced 173
content was implemented due to the new educational
initiatives
Fifth Phase: 2000-2008 177
2002: A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented to 177
streamline and update content
2008: A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented 181
based on a six-year review cycle
Sixth Phase: 2009-2014 185
2014: Home Economics renamed as Food and Consumer 185
Education and a new FCE syllabus was implemented
Conclusion 188
CHAPTER SIX: ANALYTIC FINDINGS
Aims and Objectives of the Curriculum 194
The priority of teaching life skills 194
The importance of teaching process skills 196
Structure and Content of the Syllabus 197
An ‘overloaded’ syllabus 197
‘Excessive’ scope in the theoretical content 199
xi
The questionable relevancy of specific content 201
The ‘inadequacy’ of resources 201
Flexibility to ‘customise’ the syllabus 202
Delivery of Lessons 204
‘Insufficiency’ of assigned curriculum time 204
The need to benchmark the quality of teaching 205
Useful strategies to enhance lessons delivery 206
Assessment of Learning 209
Deviations in the assessment format 209
Setting ‘appropriate’ expectations in assessment of student 211
learning
Teachers’ Competency and Training 212
‘Inadequacies’ in the teachers’ training programme 212
The need for better guidance and mentoring for new teachers 215
posted to schools
Organisational Communication Practices 216
The need for professional sharing among teachers of different 216
schools
The need to improve communication and coordination between 217
relevant organisations
Status and perception of subject Home Economics 218
Conclusion 220
CHAPTER SEVEN: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
Influences on the Development of the Home Economics curriculum in 224
xii
Singapore
Global trends in Home Economics education 224
The influence of gender equity 224
The need for flexible and transferable skills 228
Responding to consumerism 229
Utilisation of ICT 233
National objectives and government policies 235
New Education System 236
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation 239
IT Masterplan 239
National Education 240
Innovation and Enterprise 242
Teach Less, Learn More 242
Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student 243
Outcomes
Achievements and Challenges of the Contemporary Home Economics 245
Curriculum in Singapore
Preparing the 2014 FCE syllabus 245
Achievements of the contemporary Home Economics curriculum 246
Flexible and innovative 246
Expansion in subject knowledge and functions 248
Supportive of national interests and special needs 249
Responsive to international educational practices and 251
pedagogy
Challenges of the contemporary Home Economics curriculum 252
xiii
Need for more curriculum time and better resources 252
Unmet Professional Development needs 254
Subject misconceptions and low status 256
The Development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore 256
Conclusion 258
CHAPTER EIGHT: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overview of the Study 260
Summary of Findings 262
History and development of the Home Economics curriculum 262
Key development 1 263
Key development 2 263
Key development 3 264
Key development 4 264
Key development 5 265
Current issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers 265
Thematic area 1: Aims and objectives of the curriculum 265
Thematic area 2: Structure and content of the syllabus 265
Thematic area 3: Delivery of lessons 266
Thematic area 4: Assessment of learning 266
Thematic area 5: Teachers’ competency and training 266
Thematic area 6: Organisational communication 267
practices
Thematic area 7: Status and perception of subject Home 267
Economics
xiv
Recommendations 267
Recommendation 1 267
Recommendation 2 269
Recommendation 3 271
Recommendation 4 272
Recommendation 5 273
Achievements of the study 274
Implications for further research 275
Conclusion 277
REFERENCES 278
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Participant Information Form – Interviews 303
Appendix 2: Participant Information Form – Oral Histories 304
Appendix 3: Participant Consent Form 305
Appendix 4: List of Interview Questions 306
Appendix 5: Coding Example – Documentary Data 307
Appendix 6: Coding Example – Interview Transcripts 308
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Structure of the secondary school Home Economics curriculum in 9
Singapore
2. Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes 50
3.1 Curriculum framework for the Express course 53
3.2 Curriculum framework for the Normal (Academic) course 53
3.3 Curriculum framework for the Normal (Technical) course 54
4. Pathways and flexibility between the different secondary school 55 courses
5. Components of Content Analysis from Krippendorff 126
6. Components of Data Analysis: Interactive Model from Miles and 130
Huberman
7. Summary of the analytic findings on key issues and concerns of 220
Home Economics teachers regarding the teaching (and learning) of
Home Economics in Singaporean secondary schools
xvi
8. Summary of the influences, achievements and challenges of the 259
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
xvii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. An Overview of the Research Design 108
2. Timeline for the History and Development of the Home 140 Economics Curriculum in Singapore, 1965-2014
xviii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AAFCS: American Association for the Family and Consumer Sciences ACARA: Australia Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority CDC: Curriculum Development Council CLA: Constructivist learning approaches CPD: Curriculum Planning Division CPDD: Curriculum Planning and Development Division FCE: Food and Consumer Education FCS: Family and Consumer Sciences GCE: General Certificate of Education HEIA: Home Economics Institute of Australia HOTS: Higher order thinking skills HPB: Health Promotion Board HPE: Health and Physical Education ICT: Information and Communication Technology IFHE: International Federation for Home Economics IP: Integrated Programme IT Masterplan: Information Technology Masterplan ITP: Initial Teacher Preparation KLA: Key Learning Area MOE: Ministry of Education NES: New Education System NIE: National Institute of Education PE: Physical Education THESA: Teachers of Home Economics Specialist Association
xix
UN: United Nations
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
This thesis reports research aimed at developing understandings of Home Economics
education in Singapore, involving the goals and direction of the curriculum over
time, the nature and extent of change, the catalysts for curriculum transformation,
and the experiences and viewpoints of teachers delivering the curriculum in
Singapore secondary schools. With the understanding that educational design is
developmental (Oliva & Gordon, 2013), the rationale for this study was that future
curriculum design and implementation would benefit from having this history of
themes, purpose and drivers made available, and from teacher insights on the
curriculum. The secondary school Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has
undergone many transformations from Independence in 1965 to the present day, yet
prior to this study this history of change and development had not been fully
documented or analysed. Until this study, the key influences on curriculum design
had not been identified. And until this study, there existed very limited information
on the issues and concerns of Singapore secondary school teachers in respect to the
Home Economics curriculum.
This study was designed to be carried out in two stages. The first stage examined the
history of the curriculum from 1965 to the design of the 2014 curriculum, the current
curriculum at the time of writing. Syllabi and other documents, and interview
transcripts from discussions with former curriculum designers and teachers were the
foundation for the development of this history. The second stage explored teacher
2
concerns and issues in delivering the existing (2014) Home Economics curriculum.
An interpretivist approach was used whereby one-to-one and focus group interviews
were undertaken with beginning and experienced Home Economics teachers from
the different (mainstream, autonomous and independent) types of Singapore
secondary schools.
This chapter is divided into seven main sections. The first section provides an
overview of the background and context to the study. There are three contexts
described. Initial discussion focuses on how Home Economics has been and is
understood internationally. Then, the second and third contexts situate the study in
terms of how Home Economics education has developed and is expressed in Asian-
Pacific and Singaporean settings. The second section defines key concepts as they
are employed in the thesis. The third section addresses the significance of the
research. The fourth section overviews literature relevant to the study. The fifth
section presents an overview of the research methodology. The sixth section presents
the findings of the study, while the seventh section explains the structure of the
thesis.
Background and Context This study engaged with the intent and the influences of the Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore, so it was judged necessary to examine international
understandings and interpretations of Home Economics. As Chapter Two will
explain, Home Economics education is expressed under a variety of names from
country to country. As the names generally signal the focus of the educational
3
endeavour (for example, in Singapore the subject is currently identified as ‘Food and
Consumer Education’), it can be recognised that, internationally, there are differing
emphases and interpretations of the purpose of Home Economics education. These
various purposes include addressing familial needs, fostering environmental literacy,
food literacy and consumer literacy, and achieving sustainable living. Current trends
in Home Economics education internationally are towards skilling young people to
succeed in a globalised world. Thus, there is an emphasis on multi-skilling, on 21st
Century skills, and on developing students as reflective, critical thinkers.
Home Economics education in Singapore is particularly influenced by Home
Economics policies and practices of three countries in the Asia-Pacific region. These
countries are Australia, Hong Kong and Japan (CPDD, 2013). Their approaches are
briefly discussed below.
Australia
Home Economics-related subjects are offered in all states and territories across
Australia in secondary schools, engaging varying content and pedagogical
approaches (HEIA, 2010). According to the Home Economics Institute of Australia
(HEIA), the goal of Home Economics education (in Australia) was the wellbeing of
individuals and families in their everyday living (HEIA, 2010). This idea of
‘wellbeing’ not only refer to such ‘traditional’ objectives such as good nutrition
habits, but also to students developing as empowered, active, multi-skilled, versatile
and informed members of (global) society. These are ideas that have influenced
Home Economics in Singapore. A possible flaw in Home Economics education in
4
Australia was that vital knowledge areas and skills were dispersed across subjects,
which included ‘Health and Physical Education’ and ‘Technologies’ (HEIA, 2010).
In 2014, the Australia Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA)
addressed the question of what content belonged in Home Economics education,
issuing what was presented as improved curricula on ‘The Australian Curriculum:
Health and Physical Education’ and ‘The Australian Curriculum: Technologies’. But
due to a review of the Australian Curriculum, as directed by the new federal
government, the final versions of the endorsed curricula were only released in
October 2015 (HEIA, 2015). According to the ACARA (2016), where Home
Economics was offered as a subject, or Home Economics related subject, the
elements of learning were drawn from content in both ‘Health and Physical
Education’ and ‘Technologies’ in the Australia Curriculum.
Hong Kong
Home Economics education in Hong Kong has a similar early history to Home
Economics education in Singapore, in that it was very much oriented towards the
acquisition of basic domestic and child-rearing skills. In Hong Kong, it was, initially,
actually conceived as a subject for female servants (Henry, 1989). From the 1950s
until 1975, this education was simply known as ‘Domestic Subject’. In 1975, the
name changed to ‘Home Economics’ and six years later, a Home Economics
curriculum was introduced, but the emphasis was still on what today we would see as
low-level education, for example, rote memorising and drills and very limited theory
(Ma & Pendergast, 2011). There were only three subject areas covered in the
curriculum. These were Housecraft, Cookery and Needlecraft. From the 1980s, the
5
subject did become a core area of study at lower secondary. There were further
changes made from the mid1980s to the mid1990s that broadened out subject content
and extended the desirable skills range. By the mid1990s, the syllabus was
promoting student-centered approaches and experimental learning to develop
students’ personal and communal values in deciding priorities for choice and
decision making (Ma & Pendergast, 2011).
As an outcome of a 1999 review, Home Economics was categorized under the key
learning area (KLA) of Technology Education (CDC, 2000). The subject was
renamed as ‘Technology and Living’ in 2009. Learning objectives included
promoting the wellbeing of individuals, families, societies and the world as a whole
through the study of contemporary issues and concerns related to food or clothing
from different perspectives, as well as promoting effective resources management
(CDC & HKEAA, 2015).
Japan
In pre-WWII Japan, Home Economics was a subject referred to as ‘homemaking’ or
‘sewing’. As in Hong Kong, the subject was exclusively delivered to girls. However,
in Japan, it was a main subject area of secondary education for the female
population, rather than a subject for girls exclusively from domestic service and low
socio-economic backgrounds (Noda, 2005). After the War, there were various
changes, but the basic orientation of the subject, that of training girls (and girls only)
for domestic duty did not alter dramatically until the 1990s, when a perceived loss of
‘need’ for a societal gendered division of labour allowed Home Economics to
become a co-educational subject and broadened its purposes.
6
In the 21st Century, Home Economics is offered in elementary schools, junior high
schools and senior high schools (Japan Association of Home Economics Education,
2012). The objectives of Home Economics are to: enable students to acquire basic
and fundamental knowledge and skills necessary for an independent life through
practical and hands-on activities relating to food, clothing and housing; deepen
understanding of the functions of a family; and have students look forward at their
future lives and take up issues to develop the skills and attitudes towards a better life
(Japan Association of Home Economics Education, 2012). The Japanese Home
Economics curriculum is now oriented towards enabling students to learn about
interpersonal relationships through role-playing activities and actual social
interactions with children and the elderly, and encouraging students to identify
societal issues and successfully negotiate the challenges of living in a diverse, global
society (Ito, 2017).
Singapore
The Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has gone through many phases of
revision since Independence. An overview of the key phases related to the revision of
the Home Economics curriculum since 1965 are as follows: At Independence, the
approach taken was that all girls had to study Domestic Science. In 1977, girls were
given the choice of studying either Technical Studies or Home Economics. In 1979, a
Ministry of Education (MOE) report led to the New Education System, which
comprised the provision of streaming and changes to the school curriculum to meet
the differentiated needs of students (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999). In 1980, a new Home
7
Economics syllabus was issued, with emphasis on the management of personal and
family resources (MOE, 1980).
In 1985, a revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented, as Home Economics
was made compulsory for all lower secondary girls (MOE, 1985). In 1991, the MOE
declared that Home Economics would be a compulsory subject for both lower
secondary school male and female students from 1994 onwards. This announcement
generated a new Home Economics syllabus that was designed and implemented in
stages, beginning with boys in the Normal (Technical) course in 1994, to boys in the
Normal (Academic) course in 1996, and to all boys in the Special and Express
courses by 1997. The revised syllabus emphasised knowledge and skills that would
enable pupils to become creative problem-solvers and decision-makers (CPD, 1994).
In 1997, new educational initiatives led to a content reduction exercise for all
curricula. In 2002, the MOE adopted a policy of reviewing the Home Economics
curriculum in a six-year cycle. A new syllabus was duly implemented in 2008
(CPDD, 2007). From 2014 onwards, the subject was renamed as Food and Consumer
Education (FCE), with the focus on infusing the learning of 21st Century skills. The
broad aim was to empower students to be health-conscious and discerning
consumers, to enable them to better manage their lives for the present and future. The
new syllabus was organised into two compulsory Core Areas of Study, namely Food
Studies and Consumer Studies. It included three Elective Modules of Nutrition and
Food Science, Food Entrepreneurship, and FCE and the Community (CPDD, 2013).
Schools had the flexibility to choose any one of the electives for their students to
carry out a project that made use of the knowledge and skills they had learnt.
8
At the secondary level in Singapore, students are placed in the Express, Normal
(Academic) or Normal (Technical) course, based on their Primary School Leaving
Examination results. The different curricular emphases were designed to match their
learning abilities and interests (MOE, 2015a). There are three different types of
government or government-aided secondary schools, including mainstream schools,
autonomous schools and independent schools. (The study reported in this thesis
utilised participants from across the three types of school.) Independent and
autonomous schools emerged as a consequence of the process of decentralisation of
mainstream schools (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999). Mainstream schools, however, are
still far more numerous. They adhere to set national standards and carry out the
curriculum and programmes prescribed by the MOE. Independent schools enjoy
greater autonomy in curricular innovations, implementations of school programmes,
administration, recruiting teachers, student admissions and setting of fees structures.
Autonomous schools have the flexibility to introduce innovations, while complying
with national standards regarding the core curriculum and bilingualism policy (Yip et
al., 1997).
Definition of Concepts
It has been pointed out, in this introductory discussion, that geographically and
historically, there have been and continue to be different understandings about the
nature and purpose of Home Economics. This study needed to be able to deal with
the different interpretations and therefore needed a suitably broad and flexible
definition to work with. For the purposes of this study, ‘Home Economics’ was
9
understood as “a field of study that draws from a range of disciplines to achieve
optimal and sustainable living for individuals, families and communities”, as
prescribed by the International Federation for Home Economics (IFHE) in its
position statement (IFHE, 2008).
A critical concept that had to be resolved for this study was ‘curriculum’. In respect
to secondary school education, the MOE in Singapore had a fundamental curriculum
framework for all subjects in the secondary school courses (MOE, 2015a). (More
information about the MOE curriculum framework is presented in Chapter Two).
From this curriculum framework, the Curriculum Planning and Development
Division (CPDD) in the MOE developed the individual subject syllabus, which
expresses the aims and goals of the curriculum (CPDD, 2012a). Following, schools
then implement the syllabus according to the degree of autonomy and flexibility
which they have been granted under the different types of secondary schools. A
structure depicting the integration of these elements in the secondary school Home
Economics curriculum is displayed in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Structure of the secondary school Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore
Fundamental curriculum framework for all subjects in the secondary school courses (issued by the MOE)
Home Economics syllabus (developed by the CPDD)
Implementation of the Home Economics syllabus by the schools (according to the type of secondary school)
10
In this thesis, the terms ‘syllabus’ and ‘curriculum’ are used synonymously to
represent the ‘Home Economics curriculum in Singapore’. A key reason for this is
that, in Singapore, the Home Economics syllabus is understood to embody the Home
Economics curriculum. There is no individual subject-based curriculum framework
for Home Economics in Singapore. The implementation of Home Economics is
based predominantly on the guidelines set out in the subject syllabus. Furthermore,
the syllabus laid out detailed objectives and content of the subject, and contained a
framework which guided pedagogy and assessment (CPDD, 2012b). This means that
in Singapore, the Home Economics syllabus encompasses all key components of a
curriculum, including the goals, content, pedagogy and assessment, as depicted in
common curriculum design models, such as Tyler’s original model (1949).
Another critical concept to be determined was the definition of the terms ‘concerns’
and ‘issues’, in respect to teachers’ perspectives in delivering the Home Economics
curriculum. In this thesis, ‘concerns’ focussed on priorities teachers maintained about
teaching/learning the 2014 curriculum, and ‘issues’ was defined as perceived
challenges teachers encountered with teaching/ learning the 2014 curriculum.
Originality and Significance
As indicated earlier, there is very limited published literature documenting the
development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore, and barely any
research has been undertaken on the teaching of the subject in schools. This research
was intended to address these gaps in knowledge by providing a history of the
11
development of the Home Economics curriculum from 1965 to the present and by
identifying the issues and concerns of those educators charged with implementing the
2014 curriculum.
This study contributed to knowledge in three domains. The first domain was the
design of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. As curriculum design is
developmental, it is important to know the history of design and intent. This study
provided this history. As a result of this study, there is now a body of knowledge that
can enable the planning and formulation of Home Economics curriculum to be
enhanced, through the opportunities to identify and analyse the influences,
continuities, changes, improvements and shortcomings between and across different
Home Economics curricula over time. The study also contributed to future
curriculum design by presenting teacher insights on the existing curriculum. The
provision of practitioner assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of the current
curriculum is precious information for future curriculum design (Kelly, 1989; Oliva
& Gordon, 2013).
The second domain this study contributed to was pedagogy in Home Economics in
Singapore. The research identified the priorities of teachers delivering the curriculum
(their concerns), the challenges they experienced in respect to the curriculum (their
issues) and also shed light on the strategies they used for addressing these issues.
Hence findings from this research are offered as insights for policy development and
for improving practices, especially in relation to the Home Economics curriculum
itself, the teaching of Home Economics in schools, and the training of Home
Economics teachers.
12
Third, this study has sought to promote further research with regard to Home
Economics education in Singapore, and helped to contribute to the body of
educational literature in this area. The research delivered a comprehensive
description and analysis on the current situation in the development and
implementation of the Home Economics curriculum. This information may provide
useful insights and a valuable framework for those who wish to engage in further
critique as well as instigate further studies relating to the teaching and learning of
Home Economics in schools.
Overview of the Literature
The literature review is organised into three broad categories: theoretical
perspectives of the Home Economics curriculum; empirical literature on
teaching/learning in Home Economics education; and empirical literature on Home
Economics teachers’ perspectives on the curriculum they deliver.
Theoretical perspectives of the Home Economics curriculum
To understand the formulation and development of the Home Economics curriculum
in Singapore, it was judged necessary to review key theoretical perspectives of the
Home Economics curriculum. The discussion focussed on the three main concepts of
the Home Economics curriculum, namely, curriculum design, curriculum delivery
and assessment of learning. Key interpretations by leading professional institutions
and major authors were presented in these reviews.
13
The review initially examines an early and significant change in perspective about
the Home Economics curriculum. Leading authors Brown and Paolucci (1979)
identified the then dominant approach to curriculum design and delivery as the
‘technical approach’, characterised by teaching students expert ways to do household
tasks. Brown and Paolucci (1979) claimed the failing in this approach was that it did
not address questions of meaning or value. They argued that the Home Economics
curriculum should embrace a ‘critical science’ approach, centring on asking
questions and finding answers, helping students learn to think, reason, reflect and
take action, through the study of recurring, practical problems.
With regard to lesson delivery, the IFHE (2009) and the Home Economics
Department of St. Angela’s College (2010) recommended the integration of
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to support new trends in
teaching and learning, as well as to promote effective communication and
collaboration between students.
In terms of assessment, a key interpretation by Smith and de Zwart (2011) revealed
the use of four different measures to collect the evidence of learning, namely:
observations, conversations and conferences; performance and performance tasks or
projects; test and test-like procedures; and portfolios. The authors maintained that
student learning was best supported when assessment was planned concurrently and
integrated coherently with instruction.
14
Teaching/Learning in Home Economics education
The first point to note here is that there is a general absence of studies of Home
Economics education in Singapore. As such, the decision was made to frame this
study by reviewing key studies conducted internationally. As the study was, in part,
concerned with the priorities and challenges Singapore teachers had in delivering the
curriculum, the review examined studies that identified teaching/learning and
curriculum issues, through a variety of writers (for example, Piscopo & Mugliett,
2012; Lai & Lum, 2012; Ma & Pendergast, 2011; Hirose, 2011; Mimbs, 2005;
Shommo, 1995). As an example of how selection for the review was made, Hirose
(2011) was selected because his investigation of Family and Consumer Sciences
teachers’ utilisation of technology to teach higher order thinking skills in America
was relevant for Singapore, as one major educational initiative implemented by the
MOE was the incorporation of ICT to support effective teaching and learning and to
prepare students for the knowledge-based economy of the 21st Century.
Home Economics teachers’ perspectives on curriculum/delivery
The empirical studies in this section examined Home Economics teachers’
viewpoints on issues related to Home Economics education, focussing on curriculum
and curriculum delivery. Key works reviewed for this discussion included Arnett,
2012; Dewhurst & Pendergast, 2008; and the HEIA, 2002. The reason for reviewing
this body of knowledge was that this study was concerned with teacher viewpoints in
Singapore and it was judged important to identify the common kinds of issues found.
As an example of how selection for this section of the review was made, a HEIA
(2002) study was included because it related to the thesis focus on the
15
implementation of the new FCE curriculum in schools. It identified and offered an
understanding of issues that could be faced by Home Economics teachers in
Singapore. Furthermore, recommendations put forward in the study to address the
issues were judged to have possible applicability to Home Economics education in
Singapore schools.
Overview of Research Methodology
The aim of this study was to develop understandings of Home Economics education
in Singapore, involving the goals and direction of the curriculum over time, the
nature and extent of change, the catalysts for curriculum transformation, and the
experiences and viewpoints of teachers delivering the curriculum in Singapore
secondary schools. The three specific research aims of the study were:
1. To investigate the history of the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from Singapore’s independence in 1965 to 2008.
2. To investigate developments in the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from 2008 to 2014.
3. To investigate the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers
regarding the teaching of Home Economics in three different types of
secondary schools in Singapore, namely, mainstream schools, autonomous
schools and independent schools.
There were two stages to the study, the first involving historical research and the
second an inquiry into the concerns and issues for teachers delivering the curriculum
current at the time of writing. For research purposes, the historical study was further
16
broken down into two phases, 1965-2008 and 2008-2014. The reason for separating
out 2008-2014 from this general history was that it was judged necessary to place
special attention on comparison (influences, continuities and changes) of the
curricula of 2008 and 2014 and on the design of the 2014 curriculum, both to
facilitate the investigation with teachers into their issues and concerns with the 2014
curriculum, and to accommodate the significant transformation made in the 2014
curriculum that was conveyed, for example, in the complete change of name for the
subject. Accordingly, research questions were developed for the study to address
both ‘phases’ of history.
In sum, research questions to address the aims of the study were as follows. Research
questions were developed to address the goals of describing and exploring the Home
Economics curriculum implemented from 1965 until 2008. The areas of focus
included influences, continuities and changes between the different curricula that
were implemented during this time period. The interpretation of this history then
provided a broad context for the remainder of the study.
Research questions were developed to explore the developments of the current Home
Economics curriculum from 2008 to 2014. The focus was on describing and
analysing the influences, continuities and changes of the current curriculum. It was
judged that this particular structure of investigation would elicit valuable information
for the next rounds of curriculum development and design.
Research questions were developed to investigate the issues and concerns of Home
Economics teachers from the three school types: the mainstream, autonomous and
17
independent schools. Attention to the perspectives of Home Economics teachers
rested on the assumption that the teachers were key stakeholders in education and
‘insider experts’, and it was therefore crucial to develop understandings of their
experiences and viewpoints for improvement to be achieved in future curriculum and
teacher training. It was considered that different types of secondary schools in
Singapore may have different approaches in implementing the Home Economics
syllabus. From this understanding it followed that it was necessary to investigate the
issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers from the three school types. It is
worth reiterating here that ‘concerns’ focussed on teaching/learning priorities in
respect to the curriculum and ‘issues’ identified perceived challenges in relation to
the curriculum. Again, the point is made that for teachers in the subject, ‘the Home
Economics curriculum’ and the ‘Home Economics syllabus’ were one and the same
and the study, for reasons explained, accommodated this view.
Overall, the intention was that the findings from the research would be useful for
informing future developments of the Home Economics curriculum, as well as for
improving practices regarding the teaching of Home Economics in Singapore
schools.
Research questions
In line with the study aims, the following research questions were generated to guide
the study.
18
First research question: What was the history of the secondary school Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore from the country’s independence in 1965 to
2008?
Guiding questions:
1. What were the influences that generated the creation and implementation of
curricula associated with Home Economics in Singapore from 1965 to 2008?
2. What were the continuities between the different curricula implemented from
1965 to 2008?
3. What were the changes between the different curricula implemented from
1965 to 2008?
Second research question: What developments have taken place with regard to the
secondary school Home Economics curriculum in Singapore from 2008 to 2014?
Guiding questions:
1. What were the influences that generated the creation of the 2014 Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore?
2. What were the continuities between the 2008 and 2014 curricula?
3. What were the changes between the 2008 and 2014 curricula?
Third research question: What were the issues and concerns of Home Economics
teachers regarding the teaching of Home Economics in Singaporean secondary
schools?
Guiding questions:
19
1. What were the intentions of the Home Economics teachers with regard to the
Home Economics curriculum? What reasons did they give for these
intentions?
2. What strategies did the Home Economics teachers use to achieve these
intentions? What reasons did they give for selecting these strategies?
3. What was the significance of these intentions and strategies for the Home
Economics teachers? What reasons did they give for the significance which
they attribute to these intentions and strategies?
4. What outcomes did the Home Economics teachers expect from pursuing their
intentions? What reasons did they give for these expected outcomes?
Theoretical framework
As the three research questions required two different approaches in the strategy, this
study was framed and carried out in two stages. The first stage applied to the first
and second research questions, which investigated the historical background and
developments of Home Economics in Singapore to the emergence of the 2014
curriculum. This required an approach that would enable the researcher to study and
explain the meanings, phrases and characteristics of an issue at a specific point of
time in the past. Therefore, the ‘historical research’ approach (Ellis & Levy, 2009)
was adopted. Wiersma and Jurs (2005) explained this approach as a systematic
process of describing, analysing, and interpreting the past based on information from
selected sources that related to the topic under study. For this study, the key sources
were syllabi, policy statements and educators. Essentially, oral histories (Wiersma &
Jurs, 2005) supplemented and helped explain documentary sources.
20
The second stage applied to the third research question, which addressed the issues
and concerns of Home Economics teachers implementing the 2014 curriculum in the
different types of secondary school. This required an approach that could provide a
detailed understanding of a particular issue from the perspectives of the participants.
Therefore, the interpretivist paradigm, with symbolic interactionism as the theoretical
perspective, was adopted. This theoretical perspective emphasises social interaction
as the basis for knowledge (O’Donoghue, 2007), which aligns with the interpretivist
view that the interaction between people is essential to understanding meaning
(Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). Woods (1992) indicated that meaning is derived from our
experiences of situations, and is constantly modified, even totally changed because
we are in continual engagement with the world around us. Hence in symbolic
interactionism, the meaning of each thing is constantly adjusted and shaped by new
information, rather than being fixed (Woods, 1992).
Selection of participants
There were two groups of participants for this study. The first group were educators
who could contribute to the history the study developed, shedding light on the
reasons for and nature of curriculum design and change and the issues of
implementation. In respect to this group, oral histories were collected from
curriculum developers and teachers who were involved in some way with the
development of the Home Economics curriculum at the time point of interest.
Snowball or chain sampling (Punch, 2009) was used to identify cases of interest from
people who know what cases were information-rich. Participants selected for the oral
histories included existing and retired Home Economics teachers and MOE
curriculum specialists, identified through the Home Economics teachers’ network, as
21
well as from officials from the MOE and from the National Institute of Education
(NIE).
The second group of participants were teachers delivering the 2014 curriculum.
Interviews were carried out with Home Economics teachers from the three different
types of secondary schools. The technique of deliberate or purposeful sampling
(Punch, 2009) was used for the selection of Home Economics teachers to investigate
their concerns and issues in implementing the Home Economics curriculum.
Participants were selected from the mainstream, autonomous and independent
schools. For each type of school, three schools were selected. Within each type of
school, participants came from two different categories: teachers with less than three
years of teaching experience; and teachers with more than three years of teaching
experience (because teachers with different years of teaching experience may have
different area of issues and concerns). There were a total of 18 Home Economics
teachers engaged in the interviews.
Data collection
Document study and interviews were the two data collection methods utilised in this
study. To understand the historical background and current developments in the
Home Economics curriculum, it was necessary to review data contained in a range of
documents, supplemented by oral histories, whereas the key issues and concerns of
Home Economics teachers delivering the 2014 curriculum were investigated by
means of interviews only.
22
Document study
Documents are a rich source of data for education and social research as educational
organisations routinely produce a vast amount of documentary data (Punch, 2009).
For this study, emphasis was placed on the utilisation of primary sources (Cohen et
al., 2001) as far as possible, so as to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the data
collected. The technique of relevance sampling (Krippendorff, 2004) was used for
selection of the documents.
The major source of documentary data was from official documents, both historical
and contemporary, produced by the MOE in Singapore during the period under
study. These official documents included Home Economics syllabus guidelines and
syllabi, as well as MOE reports and statements. Other sources of documentary data
included government policy statements, reports and statements published by
professional organisations, papers presented at educational conferences, and
newspaper articles. Documents were accessed through the MOE, NIE, National
Library Board, Association of Home Economists Singapore, Singapore Press
Holdings and the internet.
Interviews
The interview is a good way of accessing people’s perceptions, meanings, definitions
of situations and constructions of reality (Punch, 2009). For this study, semi-
structured one-to-one (Fontana & Frey, 1994) and focus group (Punch, 2009)
interviews were employed. Aide-memoires (Merriam, 1988) were developed for both
interviews which involved the 18 selected Home Economics teachers.
23
Each participant took part in one one-to-one interview which was approximately 60
minutes in length. After carrying out the one-to-one interviews, one two-hour focus
group interview was conducted with six participants comprising one ‘new’ and one
‘experienced’ teacher from each of the three school types. The focus group interview
was used to follow up on issues raised in the one-to-one interviews.
All interviews were digitally recorded using an audio recorder with notes taken by
the researcher concurrently to capture things that the audio recorder was unable to
record. All recordings were fully transcribed by the researcher. The transcripts were
brought back to the participants until agreement was reached on their substance to
ensure accuracy and validity of the data.
In addition, to supplement the documentary data for the historical development of the
Home Economics curriculum, oral histories were gathered from the interviews with
curriculum developers and other pertinent stakeholders.
Data analysis
In this study, documentary data was analysed using the approach of content analysis,
while the interview transcripts were analysed using the Miles and Huberman
Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Two methods
were selected because the Miles and Huberman approach appeared particularly
suited to addressing the nuances and subtleties of conversational data, whereas
content analysis appeared most apposite for document interrogation. In their main
aspects, the methods were judged compatible as they both focussed on generating
key themes through data reduction via coding.
24
Content analysis
Content analysis is a research technique for making replicable and valid inference
from text or other meaningful matter to the context of their use (Krippendorff, 2004).
Analysis of the documentary data was guided by the steps identified by Zhang and
Wildemuth (2009) for qualitative content analysis. They explained that to support
valid and reliable inferences, content analysis has to involve a set of systematic and
transparent procedures for processing data. Through careful data preparation, coding
and interpretation, the results from content analysis can provide thick descriptions of
the topic under study (Zhang & Wildemuth, 2009).
Miles and Huberman Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis
Miles and Huberman’s (1994) interactive model offers a systematic approach to
collecting, organising and analysing data. The authors defined data analysis as
consisting of three concurrent flows of activity, and using this approach in this study,
analysis of the interview transcripts involved the following phases: data reduction,
data display and drawing and verifying conclusions. These three components were
interwoven and occurred concurrently throughout the data analysis as per Punch
(2009).
Overview of Findings of the Study
Stage One of the study generated the following findings, identifying five key areas of
development in the history and development of the Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore.
25
1. A shift in emphasis from preparing girls for basic domestic duties in the 1965
syllabus to educating girls and boys to be health-conscious and wise consumers
in the current (2014) syllabus.
2. Regular revisions of the syllabus to incorporate the implementation of new
educational initiatives launched by the MOE, from incorporating the New
Education System in the 1980 syllabus to infusing the latest ‘Framework for 21st
Century Competencies and Student Outcomes’ in the 2014 syllabus.
3. A shift in focus from training of practical skills in the 1965 syllabus to inquiry-
based learning and inculcation of values in the 2014 syllabus, as curriculum
design evolved from a technical to a critical science approach.
4. Streamlining of subject content to maintain relevancy with changing lifestyle
and social needs, consolidating from five main areas of study in the 1965
syllabus to only two core areas of study in the 2014 syllabus.
5. Revision of subject identity to signify new directions in the curriculum and to fit
in with global trends, from renaming ‘Domestic Science’ as ‘Home Economics’
in 1970, to ‘Food and Consumer Education’ in 2014.
Stage Two generated the following findings, involving seven emergent thematic
areas in relation to the key issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers in
implementing the curriculum.
1. Aims and objectives of the curriculum: Teachers emphasised the teaching of life
skills and process skills.
2. Structure and content of the syllabus: Teachers indicated issues regarding an
‘overloaded’ syllabus, ‘excessive’ scope in the theoretical content, the
26
‘questionable relevancy’ of specific content, the ‘inadequacy’ of resources, and
the need for flexibility to ‘customise’ the syllabus.
3. Delivery of lessons: Teachers shared issues involving ‘insufficiency’ of assigned
curriculum time, the need to benchmark the quality of teaching, and useful
strategies to enhance lesson delivery.
4. Assessment of learning: Teachers reflected on ‘deviations’ in the extent/range of
the assessment format, and on setting ‘appropriate’ expectations in the
assessment of student learning.
5. Teachers’ competency and training: Teachers shared on ‘inadequacies’ in the
teachers’ training programme, and the need for ‘better’ guidance and mentoring
for new teachers posted to schools.
6. Organisational communication practices: Teachers indicated the need for more
professional sharing among teachers of different schools and the need to
improve communication and coordination between relevant organisations.
7. Status and perception of subject Home Economics: Teachers reflected the need
to raise the status of Home Economics and to eliminate lingering misconceptions
that Home Economics was ‘domestic training’.
Overall, the study found that curriculum design has been generally progressive and
evolutionary, influenced by external factors relating to international educational
developments (including global trends in Home Economics education), and by
factors directly related to Singapore’s social, economic, educational and political
needs. Essentially, the curriculum has moved from narrow purpose and skill set
towards broader goals and arguably an increasingly enlightened view. Its mission has
been revised and refined and its target client group expanded and re-imagined. The
27
study also found major challenges encountered by teachers implementing the
curriculum in schools, which included the need for more curriculum time and better
resources, unmet professional development needs, and misconceptions of the subject
and its ‘low’ status amongst educational subjects.
Structure of the Thesis
This chapter has provided an introductory overview of the study reported in this
thesis. The background and context of the study were identified, and the definition of
key concepts was established. The significance of this study was highlighted and its
contribution to knowledge was suggested. The selected main bodies of literature with
regard to Home Economics education were presented. An outline was given of the
theoretical framework and research methods adopted by the study. An overview of
the findings of the study was also provided. Subsequent chapters of this thesis will
present the various aspects of the research in more detail.
Chapter Two provides the background and context to the study. This chapter presents
the context of Home Economics education in relation to international, Asian-Pacific
and Singaporean settings. This chapter also provides an account on Singapore’s
education system, with a specific focus on the secondary school structure through
which the subject is taught.
Chapter Three presents a review of the literature pertinent to the study. The chapter
explains how literature was organised for the review and then discusses three key
bodies of literature that were determined. The first collection of literature engages
28
with theoretical perspectives of the Home Economics curriculum with the focus on
the following components: curriculum design, delivery and assessment. The second
and third body of literature entails empirical studies on Home Economics education
and Home Economics teachers’ perspectives, respectively. The studies were selected
based on their relevancy to this research.
Chapter Four describes the research methodology used in the study. First, this
chapter introduces the theoretical framework adopted by the study, followed by a
description on the selection of participants. It then moves on to discuss the methods
used for data gathering and data analysis, and concludes with considerations and
actions with regard to the ethical issues.
Chapter Five analyses the history of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
with data collated from the document study and oral histories. This chapter identifies
major transformations and developments of the Home Economics curriculum from
1965 to 2014, and examines the influences, continuities and changes between the
different curricula implemented during that period.
Chapter Six reports the key issues and concerns of teachers implementing the Home
Economics curriculum, from their perspective. Data collected from the one-to-one
and focus group interviews are analysed to derive the findings.
Chapter Seven discusses the development and implementation of the Home
Economics curriculum, including influences, achievements and challenges, which
29
draw on the findings across the historical inquiry, the findings regarding curriculum
developments 2008 to 2014, and the research into teachers’ issues and concerns.
Chapter Eight concludes the study reported in this thesis. First, this chapter presents
an overview of the study, including a summary of the findings. This is followed by
recommendations to address the challenges identified in the research. The chapter
ends by identifying the achievements of the study and the implications for further
research.
30
CHAPTER TWO
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
This chapter locates this study in the context of Home Economics education in
international, Asian-Pacific and Singaporean settings. Initially, consideration is given
to how Home Economics is interpreted and understood internationally and an
account is provided of global historical development and trends in Home Economics.
The chapter then examines Home Economics education in the Asia-Pacific region,
focussing specifically on developments and practices in Australia, Hong Kong and
Japan, as the approaches used in these countries influence Home Economics
development in Singapore. The discussion then moves to Singapore’s education
system and contemporary Home Economics education in Singapore. This section
incorporates an account of how government and education policies and directives
impact on the teaching and learning of Home Economics in Singapore.
The International Context of Home Economics Education Home Economics is a field of study situated in the human sciences. Other names by
which this subject is known in different countries include Family and Consumer
Sciences in the United States (AAFCS, 2012), Design and Technology in the United
Kingdom (BNF, 2009), and Technology and Living in Hong Kong (CDC &
HKEAA, 2015). However, the International Federation for Home Economics
(IFHE), the leading professional organisation representing the field worldwide,
which has consultation status with the United Nations (UN), continues to use Home
Economics as the preferred name for its professional reference.
31
International interpretations of Home Economics
There have been several key interpretations of Home Economics, presented by
leading authors and main professional organisations over time. In essence,
interpretations of Home Economics have shifted from a particular focus on
preparation for familial roles and duties to multi-skilling for family, community and
global living. This movement is discussed below.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Home Economics was fairly typically conceptualised in
terms of meeting family needs and preparing students for family roles. For example,
in the United States, Brown and Paolucci (1979) developed a definition using the
methods of philosophical inquiry. They indicated that the mission of Home
Economics was to enable families, both as individual units and as a social institution,
to build and maintain systems of action, which would lead to maturing in individual
self-formation, and to enlightened, co-operative participation in the critique and
formation of social goals and means for accomplishing them. The three systems of
actions were: instrumental or rational purposive action to secure the basic needs of
living; communicative action for understanding social norms and values; and
emancipative action in freeing from dogmatic beliefs and dominative or exploitative
social forces. In another influential work, Sullivan (1988) reiterated that the focus of
Home Economics should be on the family and preparing students for family living.
In the 1990s, the idea of context became important in mainstream interpretations of
Home Economics. An early example is that of Smith (1991), who extended Brown
and Paolucci’s conceptualisation of Home Economics by recommending the
systematic integration of global education. She explained that global Home
32
Economics education was built on a vision of complexity, uncertainty, and value
conflicts. For Smith, the aim for Home Economics was to foster the development of
reflective, critical thinkers, secure in dealing with the perennial practical problems of
families in a global society.
The idea that Home Economics should address family and family life in context
gained more traction through the 1990s. For example, the Canadian Home
Economics Association (1996) maintained that the primary focus of Home
Economics was to prepare students for everyday life in an increasing complex global
society. It (1996) argued Home Economics had to be responsive to the changing
needs of individuals and families over time and in particular contexts.
In the 21st Century, interpretations of Home Economics have tended to emphasise the
idea of multi-skilling students to meet the challenges of life (familial, social, political
and economic) in a globalised world. For example, in 2008, the International
Federation of Home Economics (IFHE) produced a position statement, ‘IFHE
position paper: Home Economics in the 21st Century’, defined Home Economics as a
field of study that drew from a range of disciplines to achieve optimal and
sustainable living for individuals, families and communities amidst the changing and
challenging environment of the 21st Century. It maintained that “Home Economics
subjects and courses of study must exhibit at least three essential dimensions:
a focus on fundamental needs and practical concerns of individuals and
family in everyday life and their importance both at the individual and near
community levels, and also at societal and global levels so that wellbeing
can be enhanced in an ever-changing and ever-challenging environment;
33
the integration of knowledge, processes and practical skills from multiple
disciplines synthesised through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
inquiry and pertinent paradigms; and
demonstrated capacity to take critical/ transformative/ emancipatory action
to enhance wellbeing and to advocate for individuals, families and
communities at all levels and sectors of society” (IFHE, 2008).
As a further example of this attention to context and to multi-skilling in recent
depictions of Home Economics, the Home Economics Institute of Australia (HEIA)
interpreted Home Economics education as building capacity for students to become
active and informed members of society, empowered to design their social futures,
contribute to the wellbeing of themselves and others, and to examine and take action
on matters of personal, community and global significance (HEIA, 2010). Similarly,
the American Association for the Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS)
explained that their ‘Home Economics’ subject, Food and Consumer Sciences, was
the comprehensive body of skills, research, and knowledge that helped people make
informed decisions about their wellbeing, relationships, and resources to achieve
optimal quality of life (AAFCS, 2012).
As the above discussion has testified, interpretations of Home Economics have
changed over time, and, in particular, there has been a shift in the last thirty to forty
years from focussing on preparing young people for family living to equipping
young people to deal with the complexities of family and community life in a global
setting. However, despite this idea of Home Economics as a vehicle for generic skills
for 21st Century living, unifying philosophical underpinnings and concepts can be
34
identified. First, there is a general assertion that the subject focuses on the
development of the wellbeing of individuals and families in their everyday living
(Sullivan, 1988; Brown & Paolucci, 1979). Second, there is the expectation that it
integrates the social, physical and human sciences in the study of problems arising
from daily lives in homes, families and communities (Canadian Home Economics
Association, 1996; Smith, 1991). Third, there is a shared understanding that Home
Economics incorporates multidisciplinary theoretical and practical learning to
empower students to become responsible and discerning members of the society
(HEIA, 2010; IFHE, 2008). Since there are unifying themes in the interpretation of
Home Economics education in the global context, these themes are also reflected in
the aims and objectives of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore.
International history and trends in Home Economics education
As described in the previous section, international interpretations of Home
Economics shifted, over time, from a focus on meeting family needs and equipping
students for familial roles to equipping students to meet the challenges of everyday
living in a complex and ever-changing (global) environment. Internationally, the
practice of Home Economics naturally sought to address the interpretations of
mission at the time. It is possible to characterise this approach in terms of two
phases, the ‘scientific approach’ and the ‘literacy for the 21st Century’ approach.
Home Economics as a Science
In 1988, the Teachers of Home Economics Specialist Association (THESA) provided
a history of Home Economics that established it as a practice that rested on the
application of science to home problems to enhance family life. According to the
35
THESA (1998), this idea that Home Economics must be practised as a ‘science’ held
sway for many decades. The THESA presented its history of Home Economics (as
practised in Canada) as follows.
For more than half of the last Century, Home Economics was pursued as the
application of science to meet the primary needs of food, shelter, and clothing. The
‘science’ directed the specific activities required to meet these needs. The client
population was exclusively female and Home Economics was specifically to
‘scientifically’ educate them for homemaking.
According to the THESA (1988), in the 1970s, the scientific emphasis shifted from
the natural sciences to social sciences in response to societal concerns, such as single
parent families and an aging population. At the same time, Home Economics
theorists provided new direction for the field. The new emphasis required
educational process other than purely technical ones, which suggested placing more
focus on cognitive processes such as critical thinking, decision making and problem-
solving.
Smith and de Zwart (2011) and Street (2006) presented a similar account on the
history of Home Economics, as practised in Canada and New Zealand, respectively.
They said that from 1900 to 1925 (predominately in the Western society), Home
Economics emerged and developed in response to social issues of the time. This was
the beginning of the progressive era in education whereby the underlying philosophy
was learning by doing. The basis of learning was technical practice working in
36
integration with a social mission. The prime focus was on the teaching of life skills
and students were able to practice household management in laboratory like settings.
From 1926 to 1960, social changes gave rise to increased social affluence (Street,
2006). Education was influenced by the philosophy of social efficiency which
assumed that students would be scientifically evaluated (for example, using IQ tests)
and educated towards their predicted role in society. The language and ideas of
industrialism infiltrated school curriculum. The assembly line factory model, was
applied to Home Economics, which meant emphasising the ‘scientific’ management
of the home became a priority (Smith & de Zwart, 2011). The scientific paradigm
was also leveraged to provide for the ‘scientific’ management of personal wellbeing
and consumer economics.
From 1961 to 1978, Home Economics responded to increased consumerism by
increasing its attention to ‘the consumer’ and by further emphasising scientific
models and methods (Street, 2006). In this period, the subject also suffered a
backlash in the light of feminist advocacy, being depicted as an attempt to keep
women at home and out of the workforce (Smith & de Zwart, 2011).
According to the authors, from 1979 to 1990, critical pedagogy began to take hold in
education. The underlying value was social justice and advocates of this position
critiqued technical rationality as being incomplete. It was at this time that Brown and
Paolucci (1979) wrote the mission statement that Home Economics education must
address the three systems of action.
37
According to Smith and de Zwart (2011) and Street (2006), in the 1990s, the trend in
practice was towards a learning paradigm that promoted practical reasoning and
critical thinking. The reflective practice mode was also promoted and ecology
became a unifying theme.
Smith and de Zwart (2011) concluded their history with the claim that Home
Economics education was a vital subject area as it was the only subject area that
focussed on everyday life and meeting basic needs, and allowed students to learn
practical and thinking skills that equipped them to handle the complexities of daily
life.
Home Economics as ‘literacy for the 21st Century’
This idea that Home Economics practice must be developed on the goal of equipping
students for daily life soon translates into equipping students for life in a complex,
global environment. That is, the shift has been made from practice as application of
scientific method to (what is being characterised here as) ‘literacy for the 21st
Century’. In a globalised world that demands flexible and variable skills, there is a
new idea of Home Economics practice as a form of ‘future proofing’ (Pendergast,
McGregor & Turkki, 2012; Pendergast, 2010; IFHE, 2008). For example, the
position statement from the IFHE (2008) argued for the need for Home Economics to
take account of the wider living environment of local and global community, as the
capacities, choices and priorities of individuals and families impacted at all levels.
The IFHE (2008) suggested that the direction for the decade ahead should be on
safeguarding the future, by focussing on questions of sustainability, advocacy and the
38
active creation of preferred futures for Home Economics, while critically reflecting
upon and being informed by its historical roots.
This idea of change is also caught in Pendergast (2010), who described Home
Economics as being at a “convergent moment”, where several key societal factors
were occurring simultaneously that provided an opportunity for major reform in the
field. These factors included changes in the roles for men and women; consumption
and globalisation patterns; generational characteristics; the need to be good at
learning new things; and changes in global demographic patterns. Pendergast (2010)
argued that one proactive way for ‘future proofing’ and towards creating a preferred
future for Home Economics, was to connect the field with the core megatrends of
aging, globalisation, technological development, prosperity, individualisation,
commercialisation, health and environment, acceleration, network organising, and
urbanisation. The author also observed that it was important to understand what
Home Economics was and stressed the need to work from a unified position
(Pendergast, 2010).
This idea of Home Economics as teaching/learning to deal with ‘modern’ societal
problems has been encouraged recently by concern in many countries over obesity
levels and by the growth of consumerism. For example, Lichtenstein and Ludwig
(2010) emphasised the role of Home Economics education in equipping young adults
with the skills essential to lead long healthy lives and combat the trends of obesity
and diet-related diseases. Similarly, Veit (2011) pointed out that too many Americans
simply did not know how to cook and their diets of highly processed foods had
contributed to obesity and chronic diseases associated with weight gain. Hence, it
39
was argued that reviving Home Economics to teach real cooking and healthy eating
in schools could help to address the health crisis facing Americans today.
Graham (2013) commented further that a certain pattern could be detected in the
concerns being aired. The author observed that besides the attention to the issues of
health and nutrition, the need for students to acquire basic financial literacy was
arguably more important than ever as debt and credit card payments spiralled up. For
all of these writers, a solution to these 21st Century problems was to employ Home
Economics education to provide a generation of young people with the skills to shop
intelligently, cook healthily, manage money, and live well.
Given these concerns and understandings, it is particularly significant that the theme
for World Home Economics Day 2016 was “Home Economics Literacy: Skills for
Families and Consumers”, and the aim was to communicate the major contribution of
Home Economics literacy to family and consumer wellbeing and quality of life
(IFHE, 2016). According to the IFHE (2016), Home Economics literacy was the
multidisciplinary expression of several literacies, including food literacy, health
literacy, financial literacy, consumer literacy and environmental literacy. Home
Economics ‘literacy’ connected elements such as knowledge, skills, culture, systems,
and behaviours to enhance quality of life. The IFHE emphasised the significance of
this literacy, by highlighting the contribution of Home Economics literacy in
promoting the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the UN 10-year framework
of programmes (10YFP) on Sustainable Lifestyles and Education Sustainability
(IFHE, 2016).
40
In sum, over time, Home Economics practice has transformed from application of the
scientific method to educating students to be literate in and across a variety of
personal and social fronts. To this point, the discussion has focussed on how Home
Economics has been conceived as a discipline or entity and how practice has moved
from ‘science’ to ‘literacy’. The next section applies a geographic context for the
study, describing Home Economics in the Asia-Pacific region.
Home Economics Education in the Asia-Pacific Region
In considering Home Economics education in the Asia-Pacific region, the focus of
this discussion is on three countries, Australia, Hong Kong and Japan. This focus is
given because these nations are recognised for their accomplishment in the field,
with regard to the IFHE statement on Home Economics education. This country
context is also particularly valuable to locating this study because approaches used in
these countries have influenced Home Economics education in Singapore. National
approaches are reviewed below.
Home Economics education in Australia
In Australia, the HEIA developed a position paper on Home Economics and the
Australia curriculum, which provided a comprehensive statement on Home
Economics education. The HEIA (2010) maintained that the central focus of Home
Economics education was the wellbeing of individuals and families in their everyday
living. Through Home Economics education, students became empowered, active
and informed members of society. The HEIA (2010) further indicated that by
bringing together transdisciplinary theoretical and practical learning, Home
41
Economics education prepared students for a range of real-life everyday challenges,
both locally and globally. In addition, the Australia Curriculum, Assessment and
Reporting Authority (ACARA) reported that Home Economics in the Australia
Curriculum supported students to develop the capacity to make decisions, solve
problems and develop critical and creative responses to practical concerns of
individuals, families and communities in the local and global context (ACARA,
2016).
Home Economics-related subjects are offered in secondary schools in all states and
territories across Australia and the schools engage varying content and pedagogical
approaches (HEIA, 2010). Generally, a school will decide whether to offer an
holistic Home Economics subject, or practice specialisation within the subject itself,
for example, specialising in Food for Living, Food Technology, Fashion by Design,
Human Development, Early Childhood Development, or Family Studies (HEIA,
2010). As a result of national approaches to curriculum that occurred during the mid-
1990s, Home Economics education has traditionally been aligned with the learning
areas of ‘Health and Physical Education’ (HPE), and ‘Technologies’. States and
territories have used different formal curriculum documents in their Home
Economics departments. In some, teachers work from the ‘HPE’ and ‘Technologies’
curriculum documents. In others, specialist Home Economics-related curriculum
documents are used (HEIA, 2010).
According to the HEIA (2010), offering Home Economics through ‘HPE’ and
‘Technologies’ framework was filled with difficulty. Home Economics became
fragmented, and lost its interdisciplinary nature and focus on the wellbeing of
42
individuals and families. As such, the HEIA (2010) suggested the Home Economics
curriculum could draw from the elements of ‘HPE’ and ‘Technologies’, and also
from those aspects of Home Economics not found in these two learning areas. In
2014, the ACARA released the improved curricula on ‘The Australian Curriculum:
Health and Physical Education’ and ‘The Australian Curriculum: Technologies’. But
due to a review of the Australian Curriculum as directed by the new federal
government, the final versions of the endorsed curricula were not released until
October 2015 (HEIA, 2015). According to the ACARA (2016), the elements of
learning in Home Economics were to be drawn from content in both ‘HPE’ and
‘Technologies’ in the Australian Curriculum. Content to be drawn from the ‘HPE’
curriculum was to be in relation to food and nutrition, growth and development,
identity, and connecting to others (ACARA, 2016). Since the Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore adheres to one standardised syllabus issued by the MOE,
there is no predicament over the curriculum documents as compared to what has
been experienced in Australia.
In addition, the HEIA (2016) reported that a partnership between ACARA and HEIA
to develop guidelines for Home Economics (in relation to the Australia Curriculum)
commenced in early 2014 and made good headway. However, progress was stalled
in 2014 and 2015 when the ACARA directed its energies to the review of the
Australia Curriculum (HEIA, 2016). Although the project was resumed in 2016, but
work had not been completed by the end of the year (HEIA, 2016).
In relation to Home Economics education, Australia has evolved frameworks for
food and nutrition education in schools. An early framework was developed through
43
the National Nutrition Education in Schools Project (DHFS, 1998). This project
sought to improve the capacity of young Australians to choose a healthy diet by
advocating an ‘empowerment’ approach to nutrition education. This approach
focussed on personal and collective action to bring about change. The framework
involved the provision of a food and nutrition education programme, providing a
range of knowledge, values and skills to empower students to take personal and
social action with regard to a range of food-related issues (Street, 2006).
In 2011, a Council of Australian Governments Report recommended the
development of a new National Nutrition Policy to meet the needs of contemporary
Australia. According to the Department of Health (2013), the Nutrition Policy would
provide an overarching framework to identify, prioritise, drive and monitor nutrition
initiatives within the context of the governments' preventive health agendas. A
scoping study was put in place to identify and analyse key priority areas for action,
and to provide a framework and strategic direction for the Nutrition Policy
(Department of Health, 2013). The final report of the scoping study, released in
March 2016, confirmed that a new comprehensive nutrition policy was urgently
needed to address the high and increasing rates of diet-related disease and risk factors
in Australia (Department of Health, 2016). However, the report did not present any
proposal in respect to food and nutrition education in schools.
Home Economics education in Hong Kong
According to Ma and Pendergast (2011), in the 1930s to 1940s, the early forms of
Home Economics in Hong Kong were treated in girls’ schools as leisure subjects.
Skills like sewing and housework were taught to help develop mothering and
44
housewifery capabilities. In the 1950s, Needlework and Housecraft were formerly
introduced in the primary curriculum. At that time, there was a strong need to
prepare girls with the necessary job skills to work as domestic servants, hence Home
Economics came into being to train young women for their rightful place in the
society (Henry, 1989).
Home Economics was introduced to the curriculum as ‘Domestic Science’ to educate
women and girls in scientific management of the home for efficiency and economy
(Ma & Pendergast, 2011). But purist scientists asked how Domestic Science could be
a scientific course without having a defined scientific body of knowledge. Thus, in
the late 1950s, ‘Domestic Science’ was renamed ‘Domestic Subject’ to acknowledge
areas of knowledge related to household. The curriculum was made up of three areas
of study, namely Housecraft, Cookery and Needlework (Ma & Pendergast, 2011).
From the 1950s to 1970s, Hong Kong grew steadily in prosperity. In 1975,
‘Domestic Subject’ was renamed as ‘Home Economics’ to reflect its use in western
countries (Ma & Pendergast, 2011). In light of the social, economic and political
changes that took place, Home Economics was offered at the secondary level in 1978
and was no longer part of the primary curriculum (Ma & Pendergast, 2011). In 1981,
the Domestic Subject syllabus was replaced by the Home Economics syllabus. The
focus of the subject remained on manipulative skills and rote memorising rather than
on critical thinking, problem-solving and decision making (Ma & Pendergast, 2011).
From the 1980s, Home Economics was a core area of study at lower secondary. The
three areas of study included Housecraft as the core with Cookery and Needlecraft as
45
optional modules (Ma & Pendergast, 2011). The curriculum emphasised practical
skills over theory and consumer education. The syllabus was revised in the mid-
1980s with Food and Nutrition becoming a compulsory area while Needlework and
Dressmaking became two separate subjects (Ma & Pendergast, 2011). A further
revision took place during 1993-1994 and brought those related subjects under one
umbrella, that is, Home Economics (Food, Home and Family) and Home Economics
(Dress and Design). In these revisions Home Economics was interpreted as a
cultural, practical and technical subject and was placed under the elective grouping
(CDC, 1993). The revised syllabus focussed on student-centered approaches and
experimental learning to develop students’ personal and communal values in
deciding priorities for choice and decision making (Ma & Pendergast, 2011).
To face the challenges of the 21st Century, the education curriculum was reviewed
again in 1999 and all subjects were classified into eight key learning areas (KLAs).
Home Economics was categorized under the KLA of Technology Education (CDC,
2000). In 2009, the subject was renamed ‘Technology and Living’ (Ma &
Pendergast, 2011). Learning objectives were to promote the wellbeing of individuals,
families, societies and the world as a whole through the study of contemporary issues
and concerns related to food or clothing from different perspectives, as well as
promoting effective resources management (CDC & HKEAA, 2015). Similar to
Hong Kong, Singapore embraced a new Home Economics curriculum in 2014 with
the focus on infusing the learning of 21st Century skills, and the subject also adopted
the new name of Food and Consumer Education to provide better alignment and
consideration to the content coverage.
46
Home Economics education in Japan
In Japan, Home Economics is offered in elementary schools, junior high schools and
senior high schools (Japan Association of Home Economics Education, 2012). The
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology produces the
curriculum standards for Courses of Study for implementation in schools.
The objectives of Home Economics are to enable students to acquire basic and
fundamental knowledge and skills necessary for an independent life through practical
and hands-on activities relating to food, clothing and housing; to deepen
understanding of the functions of a family; and to have students look forward at their
future lives and take up issues to develop the skills and attitude towards a better life
(Japan Association of Home Economics Education, 2012). The content areas of study
include Family, Home and Child Growth; Food, Cooking and Independent Life;
Clothing, Housing and Independent Life; and Daily Consumption and Environment
(Watase, 2009). According to Ito (2017), Japanese Home Economics curricula enable
students to learn about interpersonal relationships through role-playing activities and
actual social interactions with children and the elderly. The curricula also encourage
students to identify societal issues and to successfully negotiate the challenges of
living in a diverse, global society (Ito, 2017)
Noda (2005) reported that during the period prior to World War II, education was
gender-segregated. Home Economics was known as ‘homemaking’ or ‘sewing’, and
was the main subject area in the secondary education for girls. Home Economics
provided education related to women’s roles as the people to support the ‘ie’ (family)
system or the war system. Right after World War II, school in Japan was converted
47
to coeducational. Home Economics was restated as a coeducational subject for the
“construction of democratic homes” (Noda, 2005, p.96), departing from its pre-war
history. However, in reality almost no boys studied it because it was an elective
subject.
In the 1960’s, Japan actively introduced policies for high economic growth. A model
of gender-based division of labour where men should devote themselves to work,
while women should fulfil domestic responsibilities became a guideline for Home
Economics education. In secondary schools, Home Economics was made a
compulsory subject only for girls with the intention to foster ‘housewives’ to fulfil
domestic responsibilities (Noda, 2005). With the economic globalisation since the
1990’s, Japan had been grappling with structural reforms to ensure economic
survival, hence the model of gender-based division of labour had become obsolete.
The objective now was for a society where individuals, irrespective of gender, who
were motivated and had the abilities, played active roles in a transparent and fair
market that emphasised on efficiency (Noda, 2005). As a result, Home Economics
has become a co-educational subject again, in line with the global movement toward
gender equity (Ito, 2017).
A number of challenges in Home Economics education in Japan have been
identified. Noda (2005) wrote that there was a concern on the duplication of Home
Economics contents provided at elementary and secondary schools. Another concern
was that Home Economics might lose its uniqueness as a school subject due to the
introduction of Life Environment Studies and Period for Integrated Study in schools,
as they had similar contents. A further concern was how to deal with social issues, in
48
particular, the roles of women. In Japan, women traditionally maintained the home.
However, Home Economics was spurred by government policy to promote gender-
equal education, an action that sent a strong message that both men and women
should share domestic responsibilities. For this reason, some have complained that
Home Economics had embraced an ideology that was leading to the disintegration of
families (Noda, 2005).
Home Economics Education in Singapore
Singapore has a high investment in education and holds a pragmatic vision that
allows for continual fine-tuning to ensure that the main aim of the system continues
to be achieved. The education system aims to help students discover their talents,
realise their potential, and develop a passion for learning that lasts through life. It
aims to equip students with the necessary knowledge, skills and values to thrive in a
fast-changing and highly-connected world (MOE, 2012a). The following sections
discuss the education system in Singapore, with an overview of the structure and a
specific focus on secondary school education and the types of secondary schools
because Home Economics curriculum is offered at this level. The discussion then
turns to contemporary Home Economics education in Singapore and examines what
is known of issues in respect to the curriculum and the training of teachers.
The education system in Singapore
An overview
Singapore upholds a highly centralised education system. The overall education
development has been guided by strong political leadership and will to produce a
49
structure and system that is relevant and responsive to the ever-changing economic
and social landscape (Goh & Gopinathan, 2008). Key features of the Singapore
education system include bilingualism, holistic learning and integration of ICT in the
curriculum.
The education system is structured to provide each child with at least ten years of
basic education, for a broad and deep foundation to knowledge and skills. This basic
education encompasses the two key stages of the education system, which are six
years of primary school education and four to five years of secondary school
education.
With a national curriculum in place, all students have to sit for major national
examinations at the end of primary and secondary education. Upon completing
secondary education, students have the options to continue their post-secondary
education doing a pre-university course or enrol in specialised courses offered by the
various tertiary institutions, such as the polytechnics and universities.
The Singapore education system aims to inculcate in students a set of attributes
known as the Desired Outcomes of Education (MOE, 2013), by the completion of
their formal education. These desired outcomes establish a common goal for the
educators, drive the educational policies and programmes, and help to determine how
well the education system is doing. They are further translated into a set of
developmental outcomes for each key stage of the education system.
50
In 2010, the MOE implemented the Framework for 21st Century Competencies and
Student Outcomes to iterate these desired outcomes. This framework with its key
components is presented in Figure 2. Values form the core of the framework as they
shape the beliefs, attitudes and actions of a person, and knowledge and skills must be
underpinned by values. The middle ring signifies the social and emotional
competencies, skills needed to handle challenging situations effectively. The outer
ring displays the emerging 21st Century competencies necessary for the globalised
world that we live in.
Figure 2. Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes (MOE,
2010a)
The framework is used to enhance the development of the 21st Century competencies
in the students. Students need to possess life-ready competencies like creativity,
51
innovation, cross-cultural understanding and resilience so that they are in a better
position to take advantage of opportunities in a globalised world. The desired
outcomes for every student are:
a confident person who has a strong sense of right and wrong, is adaptable
and resilient, knows himself, is discerning in judgment, thinks independently
and critically, and communicates effectively;
a self-directed learner who questions, reflects, perseveres and takes
responsibility for his own learning;
an active contributor who is able to work effectively in teams, is innovative,
exercises initiative, takes calculated risks and strives for excellence; and
a concerned citizen who is rooted to Singapore, has a strong sense of civic
responsibility, is informed about Singapore and the world, and takes an active
part in bettering the lives of others around him (MOE, 2010a).
As the education system moves further into the 21st Century, schools are being urged
to foster creativity and innovation to enhance competitiveness in the global economy.
They are encouraged to take ownership of the curriculum and to develop customised
programs to meet individual students’ aptitudes and skills. On the curricular front,
key policy initiatives that have been launched by the MOE since 1997 include
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation and the Master Plan for Information Technology
in Education (Tan & Gopinathan, 2000).
The initiative of Thinking Schools, Learning Nation focussed on developing students
into active learners with critical thinking skills through explicit teaching of these
skills, the reduction of subject content, and the revision of assessment modes. The
52
Master Plan for Information Technology in Education offered to incorporate
information technology in the teaching and learning at all schools through the
support provided for physical infrastructure and teachers’ training. More details
relating to these educational policies are presented in Chapter Five.
Secondary school education and types of secondary schools
At the secondary school level, students are placed in the Express, Normal
(Academic) or Normal (Technical) courses based on their Primary School Leaving
Examination results. The Express and Normal (Technical) courses take four years to
complete while the Normal (Academic) course is a five-year programme. Students in
the Express and Normal (Academic) courses are offered academically-based subjects
while those in the Normal (Technical) course follow a curriculum that is more
practice-oriented and hands-on. The different curricular emphases were designed to
match their learning abilities and interests (MOE, 2015a).
The fundamental curriculum framework for the Express, Normal (Academic) and
Normal (Technical) courses are presented in Figure 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 respectively. The
inner circle focussing on life skills comprises the non-academic curriculum and
ensures that students acquire sound values and skills to take them through life as
responsible adults and active citizens (MOE, 2015a). The middle circle centring on
knowledge skills seeks to develop students’ thinking, process and communication
skills which enable them to express their thought and ideas clearly and effectively
(MOE, 2015a). The outermost circle covering the content-based subject disciplines
ensures that students have a good grounding in content across different areas of study
53
(MOE, 2015a). The subject of FCE is located under the Mathematics and Sciences
discipline.
Figure 3.1. Curriculum framework for the Express course (MOE, 2015a)
Figure 3.2. Curriculum framework for the Normal (Academic) course (MOE, 2015a)
54
Figure 3.3. Curriculum framework for the Normal (Technical) course (MOE, 2015a)
Generally, students can move from one course to another based on their academic
performance. At the end of four years, students in the Express course sit for the
Singapore-Cambridge General Certificate of Education or GCE (Ordinary Level)
Examination, while those in the Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) courses
sit for the GCE (Normal Level) Examination. After this, students from the Normal
(Academic) course who satisfy the requirements will go on to a fifth year of study
and sit for the GCE (Ordinary Level) Examination. The pathways and flexibility
between the different courses is displayed in Figure 4.
55
Figure 4. Pathways and flexibility between the different secondary school courses
(MOE, 2015a)
In addition, it should also be noted that some secondary schools offer the six-year
Integrated Programme (IP) which leads to the GCE (Advance Level) Examinations
or other academic diplomas. The IP provides an integrated secondary and junior
college education for students who are academically strong and prefer a more
independent and less structured learning style. Given the strong academic aptitude of
its students, the IP aims to stretch their potential by engaging them in broader
learning experience beyond the academic curriculum (MOE, 2014).
56
With regard to the outcomes of education, students should develop the following
attributes at the end of the secondary education:
have moral integrity;
believe in their abilities and be able to adapt to change;
be able to work in teams and show empathy for others;
be creative and have an inquiring mind;
be able to appreciate diverse views and communicate effectively;
take responsibility for their own learning;
enjoy physical activities and appreciate the arts; and
believe in Singapore and understand what matters to Singapore (MOE, 2013).
In Singapore, there are three main types of government and government-aided
secondary schools, namely, mainstream schools, autonomous schools and
independent schools. Mainstream schools constitute the highest number in the
secondary school population. They adhere to the national standards and carry out the
curriculum and programmes prescribed by the MOE. As the education system caters
to continual fine-tuning, one approach used in fine-tuning was the decentralisation of
schools in the form of a major change in governance, providing either
‘independence’ or ‘autonomy’ for selected mainstream schools. This process of
decentralising the school system led to the setting up of independent schools and
autonomous schools (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999). Although school principals in the
independent and autonomous schools are given greater autonomy and responsibility
in the management of their schools, they are expected to follow the core curricula
and deliver the educational policy initiatives introduced by the MOE.
57
The independent school scheme started in 1988 with three well-known government-
aided schools going independent. It was one of the measures introduced in the report
Towards Excellence in Schools (1987) to improve on the quality of schools (Ho &
Gopinathan, 1999). There were a total of eight independent schools in 2016 (MOE,
2016a). Independent schools enjoy greater autonomy and flexibility in curricular
innovations, implementations of school programmes, administration, recruiting and
deployment of teachers, student admissions and setting of fees structures. It was
hoped that with a minimum of bureaucracy in independent schools, they could
spearhead innovative programmes which would be extended to other schools later
(Yip et al., 1997). Each independent school continues to receive a grant from the
government and is allowed to set its own fees, which are considerably higher than
those in the mainstream schools. However students can apply for scholarships and
other forms of financial assistance to offset the higher school fees.
In 1992, the government announced the setting up of a number of autonomous
schools from among the good mainstream schools (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999). These
schools have been chosen for their good track record as they have continuously
obtained good results in the public examinations. This quality is known as the value-
added attribute, which means that the students did much better than could be
predicted from their performance at the point of entry to the schools. These schools
are located in different parts of Singapore, have been receiving strong community
support, and are attracting highly motivated pupils (Yip et al., 1997). Autonomous
schools enjoy greater flexibility to introduce innovations while complying with
national standards regarding the core curriculum and bilingualism policy. They
58
receive additional funding from the government and may charge additional fees to
allow them to develop innovative courses and enrichment programmes to enhance
the students’ personal and educational development. There were a total of 28
autonomous schools in 2016 (MOE, 2016a).
Contemporary Home Economics education
The curriculum
In alignment with the international understanding of Home Economics, the main
objective of the contemporary Home Economics education in Singapore is to equip
students with the knowledge and skills in food and consumer-related issues that
enhance their wellbeing in daily living. Currently, Home Economics is offered in the
lower secondary school level. All Secondary 1 and 2 students in the Express, Normal
(Academic) and Normal (Technical) courses are required to study this subject.
In addition, Home Economics is carried out as a modular subject, sharing the
allocated curriculum time within the two years of lower secondary education with
another subject known as ‘Design and Technology’. The lower secondary Design
and Technology is a subject that engages students in design-and-make activities and
processes.
When students are promoted to the upper secondary level, they have the option to
study ‘Food and Nutrition’, a subject considered to be a continuation from the lower
secondary Home Economics syllabus. The upper secondary Food and Nutrition
focuses on the main areas of nutrition and food science.
59
Lesson delivery for the Home Economics classes is generally conducted in two ways,
teaching of content knowledge in the classroom setting, and teaching of culinary
skills in the Home Economics kitchen. It is a standard requirement for government
and government-aided secondary school to be equipped with two Home Economics
kitchens. Each kitchen is designed to enable the provision of practical lessons for 20
students.
In Singapore, the usual number of student enrolment in a class is about 40, which is
rather high. Hence for safety reasons, two Home Economics teachers are deployed to
teach one class, so that one teacher can take charge of around 20 students during
practical sessions in the kitchen. The rationale being practical lessons in the kitchens
involve the use of sharp objects such as knives, and preparation of food items using
gas and electricity need to be closely monitored by the teacher to prevent accidents.
With regard to assessment for the subject, besides the usual written test and practical
work in culinary skills, students are also required to carry out a project-based
assignment. This assignment requires students to work on a project for a given task
that involved a problem-based situation. Students are expected to apply the different
types of process skills, such as analysing of task, research, decision making, planning
and evaluation, to complete the project.
Considering its development, the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has
gone through several phases of revision over time, in response to factors such as
fluctuating economics requirements, shifting ideologies of political leaders, and
changes in cultural and social norms. The approach taken by the MOE to curriculum
60
development involves a continuous cycle of implementation, evaluation and
improvement (Yip et al., 1997). To reflect the education agenda of the time, there
have been a number of name changes within the Home Economics curriculum.
Starting with ‘Domestic Science’ since 1965, it was renamed ‘Home Economics’ in
1970. And from 2014 onwards, the subject is known as ‘Food and Consumer
Education’.
The Curriculum Planning and Development Division (CPDD) is the department in
the MOE that takes charge of the curricula for all subjects offered in the government
and government-aided schools. It was previously known as the Curriculum Planning
Division (CPD) before a restructuring exercise took place in the MOE (Ang, 2008).
The mission of the CPDD is “developing a curriculum to meet the needs of the
nation, community and individual”. Its main functions include the following:
design and review syllabi and monitor their implementation;
promote teaching and learning approaches that are in line with curriculum
intent;
design assessment modes that support the desired learning outcomes;
provide support through training of school personnel for syllabus and
programme implementation;
produce and approve instructional materials; and
provide specialist advice to schools, other Divisions, Ministries and private
publishers on matters related to the curriculum (CPDD, 2012).
In March 2013, the CPDD conducted the launch for the new FCE syllabus, together
with provision of training sessions for teachers to prepare them for the new syllabus.
61
This new syllabus was to replace the 2008 Home Economics syllabus and to be
implemented in 2014. Before the proposal for the new syllabus was approved in
2011, the CPDD conducted an extensive syllabus review from 2010 to 2011 to
formulate the new syllabus (CPDD, 2013). According to the CPDD (2013), main
actions taken included engaging global and local scans that involved analysing the
global trends in Home Economics education and consultations with local tertiary
institutions and agencies, as well as conducting feedback group discussions with
representatives from the schools.
The global trends in Home Economics education was interpreted from the position
statement produced by the IFHE, and through studying the Home Economics
curriculum framework of other countries, such as Hong Kong and America (CPDD,
2013). The global scans aimed to ensure that the new syllabus is in alignment with
the directions of Home Economics education located in the international setting.
The local scans involved several consultation sessions with the relevant institutions
and agencies, such as the Health Promotion Board (HPB), Singapore Management
University, Monetary Authority of Singapore, Temasek Polytechnic and At-Sunrice
Global Chef Academy (CPDD, 2013). These consultation sessions helped to ensure
the following: relevancy and up-to-date of the syllabus content; alignment to courses
offered at the tertiary institutions; and applicability of the syllabus content and skills
for future employment. The input from these sessions also helped to propose possible
areas of study for the new Elective Modules component featured in the FCE syllabus.
In addition, recommendations and feedback were also gathered from the Syllabus
Review Committee, whose members comprised of experienced teachers from
62
selected secondary schools, and representatives from the NIE, HPB and Temasek
Polytechnic (CPDD, 2013).
One major outcome from the syllabus review was the renaming of the subject. The
rationale given was that the new subject name provides better reflection and
alignment to the content coverage, which has moved from the traditional context of
‘home’ to include consumer knowledge and application of skills to a wider
environment. Another reason offered was that the new name projects a more
professional image with regard to branding purposes, because the old subject name
of ‘Home Economics’ was perceived as outdated due to changing mindset.
The value of the 2014 FCE syllabus is based on the changing social and economic
landscape, with the concern for personal health and wealth management, and
discernment in decision making and resource management for healthy living. Hence
the FCE syllabus is designed to empower students to be health-conscious and
discerning consumers; enabling them to better manage their lives for the present and
the future. The focus is on how individuals and families optimise their resources of
food, finance and time to meet their physical, mental, social and economic needs.
The FCE syllabus aims to enable students to:
understand the importance of nutrition for long-term health;
apply basic principles of consumer education;
apply basic financial principles for everyday decision making and planning;
appreciate and develop an understanding of food, nutrition and trans-cultural
awareness in the global context;
63
nurture and develop critical thinking, problem-solving and creativity, a spirit
of enterprise, innovation, and aesthetics awareness; to make informed and
discerning food and consumer-related decisions;
develop positive attitudes and values for the wellbeing of the community
(families and society); and
demonstrate effective and responsible use of resources for the individuals
and the community (CPDD, 2013).
The syllabus is also designed to prepare students for the 21st Century, hence the
development of the 21st Century competencies is inherent in the content, learning
process and assessment task of the syllabus. The syllabus is organised into two parts,
which include the Core Areas of Study and the Elective Modules. The Core Areas of
Study is a compulsory section that takes up 75% to 80% of total curriculum time and
provides foundational knowledge in the areas of Food Studies and Consumer
Studies. The Elective Modules is an extension of learning of the core content and
takes up 20% to 25% of total curriculum time. The three elective modules being
offered are Nutrition and Food Science, Food Entrepreneurship, and FCE and the
Community. Schools have the flexibility to choose any one of the electives for their
students to carry out a project-based assignment which make use of the knowledge
and skills that they have learnt in the core content.
Training of teachers
In Singapore, the training of teachers is provided by the National Institute of
Education (NIE), the national teacher training institute. The “Initial Teacher
Preparation (ITP) programmes” in the NIE prepare an individual for a career as a
64
teacher. The programmes are intended to develop knowledge and skills required of
teachers to competently meet the demands and challenges of a dynamic teaching
career (NIE, 2016).
An individual who satisfies the admission criteria can enrol in one of the following
programmes to be trained as a Home Economics teacher. These options include the
two-year full-time Diploma in Education or four-year full-time Bachelor of Science
(Education) programmes, which cater to the pre-university and polytechnic
graduates; or the one-year full-time Postgraduate Diploma in Education programme.
These programmes are designed to prepare well-informed, competent and reflective
teachers who have an understanding of the key concepts and principles of teaching
and learning, a strong foundation in the subject matter of their area, and the ability to
apply such knowledge and skills effectively in their teaching (NIE, 2013).
The main areas of study in the NIE programmes include Education Studies,
Curriculum Studies and Practicum. Education Studies provide key concepts and
principles of education necessary for effective teaching and reflective practice in
schools. Curriculum Studies train student teachers in the methods and techniques of
teaching their subjects. Practicum provides student teachers with the opportunity to
develop teaching competencies in a variety of instructional contexts in a school
setting as they are attached to schools for this component.
In addition, those with a GCE (Ordinary Level) certificate and who satisfy the
admission criteria can also apply for the Consumer Science and Technology
programme offered by Temasek Polytechnic. This programme allows one to graduate
65
with two diplomas under the MOE’s four-year Home Economics Teachers Training
Scheme. Students need to study three years full-time at Temasek Polytechnic to
obtain the Diploma in Consumer Science and Technology and continue with one year
full-time training at the NIE to obtain the Diploma in Home Economics Education.
The training at Temasek Polytechnic is aimed at equipping students with the
scientific and technical skills related to food science and nutrition, as well as the
creative aspects of textiles and design (TP, 2013). Overall, this programme aims to
train the students to become competent Home Economics teachers. Students admitted
into this programme are fully sponsored by the MOE but they need to serve a five-
year bond with the MOE upon graduation. At the time of writing, due to falling
interest and reduction in the number of students enrolled in the programme, the
Diploma in Consumer Science and Technology has been discontinued.
Conclusion
This chapter provided several key contexts locating this study. Initially, key
international understandings, historical developments and international trends
concerning Home Economics were described. Then, Home Economics education in
the Asia-Pacific region was described, the discussion funnelling down to ‘local’
circumstances in Singapore secondary schools.
To summarise, Home Economics is a fundamental subject in the school curricula of
many countries across the world. Although there have been different interpretations
of Home Economics across time and across national contexts, unifying themes can
be identified. The common understanding is that Home Economics brings together
66
multidisciplinary theoretical and practical learning with the aim of preparing young
people to become well balanced individuals and family members, and to enhance
their daily living. Over the years, Home Economics education has evolved and
responded to changes in society and in educational philosophy. While, in its early
history, the focus of Home Economics was generally to exclusively educate women
in homemaking, internationally it is generally a coeducational subject now and
emphasises cognitive processes such as critical thinking, decision-making and
problem-solving to develop the wellbeing of individuals and families. Moving
further into the 21st Century and beyond, it is deemed important to encompass global
perspectives in Home Economics education and to work from a unified position.
The evolution of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has been influenced
by global developments and understandings concerning the form and function of
Home Economics, by approaches and innovations employed in the Asia-Pacific
region and by, local educational policies. Key policy initiatives that have been
launched by MOE since 1997 include Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, the Master
Plan for Information Technology in Education and the Framework for 21st
Competencies and Student Outcomes. Moreover, the process of decentralising the
school system has led to the set up of three main types of government and
government-aided secondary schools, namely, mainstream schools, autonomous
schools and independent schools. As the chapter has explained, the different types of
schools are given varying degree of flexibility in school management and in
implementing the school curriculum. As the highly centralised education system in
Singapore caters to continual fine-tuning, curriculum development follows a
continuous cycle of implementation, evaluation and improvement. Hence the Home
67
Economics curriculum has gone through several phases of revision over time,
coupled with a number of name changes. Starting with ‘Domestic Science’ since
1965, it was renamed ‘Home Economics’ in 1970. The main objective of
contemporary Home Economics education is to equip students with the knowledge
and skills in food and consumer-related issues that enhance their wellbeing in daily
living. From 2014 onwards the subject embraced a new syllabus with the focus on
infusing the learning of 21st Century skills, and adopted the new name of ‘Food and
Consumer Education’ to provide better alignment and consideration to the content
coverage.
The next chapter, Chapter Three, will further locate and establish the need for this
study by reviewing bodies of relevant literature.
68
CHAPTER THREE
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews literature relevant to this study in three main sections. The first
section chronologically reviews key theoretical perspectives of ‘curriculum’ and the
‘Home Economics’ curriculum. This discussion on the theoretical standpoints
provides context for understanding the theoretical approaches associated with the
formulation and development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. The
second section reviews empirical studies on Home Economics education, focussing
on findings relating to curriculum design, teaching/learning approaches, professional
development, historical development and models of delivery. These were all matters
of relevance for both stages of the study reported here. The third section reviews
empirical studies on teachers’ perspectives on curriculum and curriculum delivery, a
field of inquiry pertinent to the second stage of this study.
Theoretical Perspectives of the Home Economics Curriculum
The concept of ‘curriculum’
There are very divergent views about the nature of curriculum. In early seminal
work, Tyler (1949) suggested that curriculum consisted of four elements, and
curriculum planning, therefore, comprised of four dimensions: objectives, content or
subject matter, methods or procedures, and evaluation. He presented a rational linear
model for curriculum planning in which four fundamental questions must be
answered in developing any curriculum:
1. What educational goals should the school seek to attain?
69
2. What learning experiences can be selected that are likely to be useful in
attaining these objectives?
3. How can these learning experiences be organised for effective instruction?
4. How can we determine whether these objectives are being attained?
Tyler (1949) explained that these questions were concerned with selecting objectives,
selecting learning experiences, organising learning experiences, and evaluating.
Tyler’s model is still well received and commonly used in curriculum planning
today.
Walker (1971) developed a ‘naturalistic’ model to portray how curriculum planning
actually occurred in practice. The model consisted of a three-step sequence of
‘platform-deliberation-design’. Walker (1971) indicated that ‘platform’ meant the
beliefs or principles that guided curriculum developers. The preliminary step was to
get everyone to discuss what the platform was or should be. The second phase of
‘deliberation’ involved the process of making decisions from among alternatives
available. Planning entered the ‘design’ phase when there was sufficient consensus
so that particular courses of action could be taken. The outcome for this phase was
the creation of the curriculum design.
Kelly (1989) maintained that the most useful definition of ‘curriculum’ was one
which was broad enough to include all the learning that actually went on in schools
and all dimensions of the educational process, including the hidden curriculum. She
highlighted the vital role of the individual teacher in curriculum change and
development, observing that curriculum innovation could succeed only when
teachers were committed to the changes, and understood and accepted the underlying
70
principles. To Kelly, teachers were active agents in the change process because they
adapted and used what they had been offered in their own ways and for their own
purposes. In support of her argument that definitions of curriculum needed to be
broad, Kelly (1989) also pointed to growing awareness that each school was unique
and its curricular needs were thus largely distinctive.
According to Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery and Tabman (1995), curriculum was symbolic
representation of those institutional and discursive practices, structures, images and
experiences that could be identified and analysed in these various ways: politically,
racially, autobiographically, phenomenologically, theologically, internationally, and
in terms of gender and discourse. Pinar et al. (1995) emphasised the value of
curriculum planning and development in the experienced curriculum, not the planned
curriculum. They attempted to link the analysis of the external social context of
curriculum and schooling with the personal experience of individual students and
teachers. The authors believed that teachers, in planning and achieving what was
planned, played an important role in influencing the quality of their students’
experience.
Oliva and Gordon (2013) indicated that ‘curriculum development’ included planning,
implementation and evaluation, and suggested ten axioms for curriculum
development:
Curriculum change is inevitable and desirable.
The curriculum is a product of its time.
Curriculum changes of earlier periods often coexist and overlap curriculum
changes of later period.
71
Curriculum change results from changes in people.
Curriculum development is a cooperative group activity.
Curriculum development is basically a decision-making process.
Curriculum development never ends.
Curriculum development is a comprehensive process.
Curriculum development is more effective when it follows a systematic
process.
Curriculum development starts from where the curriculum is.
The authors maintained that teachers shared leadership responsibilities (with
curriculum specialists) in efforts to develop the curriculum, and played a significant
role in effecting curriculum change (Oliva & Gordon, 2013).
The above theoretical perspectives highlight the importance placed in the literature
on the role and influence of teachers in curriculum implementation. This position
framed in the literature supported this study’s approach of investigating teachers’
perspectives on curriculum and curriculum delivery.
Conceptualising the Home Economics curriculum
Curriculum design
In the literature, there has been much discussion of what constitutes the most
appropriate approach to adopt with regard to curriculum design. Brown and Paolucci
(1979) indicated that Home Economics should be taught within the context of a
practical application of critical theory – known as the ‘critical science perspective’,
rather than the traditional technical approach. The work of Habermas (1971)
provided much of the philosophical underpinnings of the critical perspectives, which
72
involved rational argumentation to determine the validity of values and beliefs.
According to Brown and Paolucci (1979), the technical approach focussed on a
product in a teacher-centered classroom. Students listened to lectures, memorized
facts, mastered skills, and took tests. The approach involved teaching students expert
ways to do household tasks but it did not address questions of meaning or questions
of value. According to the authors, the critical science approach was the process of
asking questions and finding answers; it helped students learn to think, reason,
reflect, and take action through the study of recurring, practical problems. Due to an
ever-changing and diverse society, families continued to be confronted with
perennial problems and issues. The authors suggested that the critical science
approach could encourage teachers to strategically plan content to help students
arrive at plausible solutions to issues and problems involving the family.
Baldwin (1989) highlighted the importance of basing educational practice on sound
curriculum theory. She provided a critique of three models of Home Economics
curriculum, namely, the technical, interpretive and critical models. Baldwin (1989)
maintained that each model had a different theoretical perspective with different sets
of assumptions concerning knowledge, learner and society, thereby supporting
different objectives. The following were Baldwin’s understandings and arguments
concerning the three models.
The technical model was based on the assumptions of empirical-analytic science. It
focussed on control and conformity to maintain the status quo in society. Baldwin
(1989) claimed that emphasis was on the most efficient techniques for the
transmission of knowledge, with close specifications of teaching and learning
73
activities. However Baldwin (1989) also argued that this model denied students the
opportunity to understand those factors which gave rise to problems of the family,
and the ability to work towards the dissolution of social constraints responsible for
family dysfunction.
The interpretive model was based on the assumptions of historical-hermeneutic
science. The focus was on communication to achieve consensus and social
integration. Baldwin (1989) indicated that emphasis was on building classroom
relationships through social construction of knowledge in a warmly supportive
teaching and learning environment. Opportunity was provided for students in the
validation of values and norms embedded in problems of family and community life
through open discussion and debate. However Baldwin (1989) also argued that this
model only partially fulfilled the aims of Home Economics education as it did not
allow for critique of ideology.
The critical model was based on the rationality of critical science. According to
Baldwin (1989), the focus was on critique and action and aimed to generate social
action to bring about needed change. The teacher helped the students to clarify their
own attitudes through self-reflection. This model allowed for development of
technical and communication skills, and sought to generate awareness to remove
oppressive constraints on thought and action. Baldwin (1989) concluded that the
critical model was most appropriate for the aims of Home Economics education as it
drew together the understandings and skills needed for efficiency in technical,
communication and emancipatory action.
74
Montgomery (2008) found two educational perspectives in the Family and Consumer
Sciences curriculum. These were the empirical-rational science-based perspective
and the critical science-based perspective. He maintained that in the empirical-
rational science-based perspective, the focus was to prepare students for their future
roles within the family or a future career. Families were viewed as producers of
goods and services, with emphasis on technical actions. Subject matter was selected
and organised by pre-determined separate areas such as food and nutrition or
clothing and textiles. Learning was focussed on hands-on activities, in order to apply
factual knowledge to make a product or to complete a goal. Teachers were viewed as
knowledge experts and students were the recipients of this knowledge.
Montgomery (2008) argued that in the critical science-based perspective, the focus
was for students to examine their multiple life roles (for example, family members,
workers, citizens) as well as family, career and community issues. Families were
viewed more as consumers, with emphasis on multiple actions: technical, interpretive
and reflective. Subject matter was selected based on perennial and evolving family,
career and community issues. Learning was focussed on the integration of how-to
skills and knowledge, as well as critical thinking and problem-solving. Teachers
were viewed as facilitators who structured active learning experiences to engage the
students. Historically, empirical-rational science provided the foundation for Family
and Consumer Sciences curriculum. However, ongoing movement was toward a
more critical science-based approach. Montgomery (2008) concluded that the critical
science-based approach best met the intent of the Family and Consumer Sciences
curriculum as the main focus was placed on perennial and evolving problems of
individuals, families and communities and the actions toward their resolution.
75
Moreover, this approach reflected the integrative nature of Family and Consumer
Sciences and core academic areas such as math, language arts, or science.
The ‘Social Efficiency Ideology’ (Schiro, 2013) was a model of curriculum design
that focussed on training students in the skills needed in the workplace and at home
to live productive lives, with the objective of meeting the needs of society efficiently.
Schiro (2013) maintained that teaching was guided by clearly defined behavioural
objectives under the social efficiency approach, as teachers selected and utilised
educational strategies developed to help students acquire the behaviours prescribed
by the curriculum. The three important elements involved were: the concept of
learning (change in human behaviour), the creation and sequencing of learning
experiences (causes, actions and stimuli which led to the desired effects, reactions
and responses), and accountability to the client for whom educators worked (Schiro,
2013). Basically, social efficiency ideology can be interpreted as a type of
programmed curriculum which consisted of a carefully sequenced set of learning
experiences that gradually led the learner from incompetence to competence.
Curriculum delivery
Major professional organisations and authors have addressed concepts related to the
delivery of the Home Economics curriculum. The Curriculum Development Council
(CDC) of Hong Kong recommended Home Economics teachers adopted a variety of
teaching and learning strategies and provided differentiated instruction to cater for
student differences, to facilitate effective learning of abstract concepts, and to
develop higher order thinking skills (CDC & HKEAA, 2015). The Council
76
maintained that the learning tasks and activities designed should be thought-
provoking and meaningful to students, with the objective of motivating them to
consolidate or enhance their understanding and their ability to put theory into
practice. Activities were to be designed to develop transferable skills such as
problem-solving in novel situations. Activities such as demonstration, discussion,
questioning, case studies, projects, games, laboratory work, simulation exercise, role
play, debate, visits and field-trips, were all to be considered, whenever appropriate.
Odu (1986) pointed to the importance of utilising demonstration to facilitate learning
in Home Economics, noting that Home Economics teaching commonly used the
demonstration method to teach skills in home care, food preparation, and clothing
construction. Odu (1986) observed, however, that demonstration needed careful
preparation by the teacher and must be very clear and of high standard. Every student
should be able to see what was being demonstrated; hence the arrangements of
lighting and seating were critical.
Smith and de Zwart (2011) maintained that in Home Economics active student
participation was crucial to student learning. Every lesson should engage a number of
teaching strategies that provided a variety of learning opportunities for the students.
The authors proposed integrating the two main models of learning, multiple
intelligences and learning styles. Multiple intelligence theory suggested that learning
be structured around learning activities that focussed on an issue and question, and
instructional strategies should allow students to display multiple ways of learning
(Mackenzie, 2002). The learning styles model was based on how people learn and
the preferences of individuals for certain types of thinking processes that affected
77
their learning behaviours (Scott, 2010). According to Smith and de Zwart (2011), as
each model had specific strengths and weaknesses, they were more effective when
used together in a classroom.
The use of ICT has been determined as crucial to student learning in Home
Economics. For example, the IFHE (2009) has affirmed its position that Home
Economics programme needs to support education for sustainable development by
using ICT. The organisation has argued that Home Economics education must make
use of the opportunities offered by digital learning and make appropriate use of ICT
to support new ways of teaching and learning (IFHE, 2009).
The Home Economics Department of St. Angela’s College (2010) argued that the
pedagogies which underpinned Home Economics exemplified constructivism, as
they facilitated learners to construct stronger cognitive links and understanding
through contextualising and consolidating real world problems and examples drawn
from a range of appropriate disciplines (Home Economics Department, St. Angela’s
College, 2010). Home Economics education focussed strongly on engaging and
maximising potential from experiential learning through ensuring learners reached
the more challenging cognitive and affective levels of learning. The Department
(2010) maintained that methods used in the delivery of Home Economics curriculum
specifically encouraged learners to work together, including through cooperative
practical work, enquiry/problem based learning and creative project based learning.
The Department (2010) claimed that all these active learning methodologies also
facilitated the integration of ICT, offering relevant and real world situations to apply
and develop key ICT competencies for effective communication. Moreover,
78
emphasis was placed on evaluative skills in order for learners to form concepts and
to create opportunities for transferring their knowledge and skills to real world
problems engaging with critical and creative thinking.
Assessment of learning
Key interpretations of assessment and concepts related to the assessment of Home
Economics include the following. According to Rust (2002), assessment could be
defined as evaluation or appraisals; it was about making a judgement as well as
identifying strengths and weakness. He stressed that assessment played a crucial role
in the education process, as it determined much of the work students undertook,
affected their approach to learning, and could be used as an indication of which
aspects of the course were valued most highly.
Garrison and Ehringhaus (2006) pointed out that both summative and formative
assessments were an integral part of information gathering on student achievement in
a balanced assessment system. Summative assessments were given periodically to
determine at a particular point in time what students knew and did not know, whereas
formative assessment was part of the instructional process to provide the information
needed to adjust teaching and learning while they were happening.
Sweeney (2009) proposed that Home Economics assessment could promote quality
learning by communicating a message to pupils that improvement and an increase in
competence was possible for everyone regardless of ability, and that the active
involvement of pupils in their own learning was essential to creating a greater sense
of purpose. Sweeney (2009) further maintained that differentiated learning outcomes
79
and tasks could be used to cater for pupils with differing learning styles, abilities and
strengths, as well as to ensure that every pupil experienced a taste of success.
Smith and de Zwart (2011) explained that student learning was best supported when
instruction and assessment were based on clear learning goals and when assessment
was planned concurrently and integrated seamlessly with instruction. The authors
maintained that assessment in Home Economics involved collecting evidence of
learning through four ways, namely: observations, conversations and conferences;
performance and performance tasks or project; test and test-like procedures; and
portfolios. In this respect, a variety of activities could be used to gather the evidence
of learning. According to Smith and de Zwart (2011), assessment activities could
include: records over time (for example, learning logs, journals, daily in-class and
homework assignments); demonstrations; pictorial displays; laboratory work; written
work; oral presentations; performance tasks; tests; and creation of products (for
example, food products, textile projects, Power Point presentations, pamphlets and
posters).
The CDC of Hong Kong defined assessment as the practice of collecting evidence of
student learning (CDC & HKEAA, 2015). The Council saw the aims of assessment
as being to provide feedback to improve learning and teaching, to report student
progress at appropriate times, to recognise the achievement of students, as well as to
enable tertiary institutions and employers to monitor standards and facilitate
selection decisions. The Council advised that assessment should be designed in line
with the curriculum aims and framework, and the learning process. According to the
Council, the emphasis should be placed on ‘assessment for learning’ as the feedback
80
obtained from learning and teaching could be utilised to make learning more
effective and improve on the teaching strategies. Assessment activities identified by
the Council included keeping a record of student performance in the learning
process; task-based exercises to assess students understanding and mastering of a
particular concept or skills; and more holistic exercises for students to demonstrate
their ability to apply the concepts and skills they have been learning in the subject.
Home Economics and feminism
In the literature, there have been reviews which focussed on the link between Home
Economics and feminism. Kho (2004) indicated that in Singapore before the 1990s,
girls primarily studied Home Economics and the desired cultural values to preserve
patriarchy were inculcated through this curriculum. However social and economic
changes in the 1990s acknowledged women’s dual role as co-earner and home-
maker, and Home Economics were offered to both boys and girls from 1994
onwards. This action brought about a significant shift in ideology and the curriculum
was modified to provide a more balanced presentation of gender roles in the family
(Kho, 2004).
Hearne and Johnston (2009) explained that Home Economics education could be
seen as a “proto-feminist social movement” to empower women in the twentieth-
century. They pointed out that Home Economics professionals had considered
carefully about women’s role in the society, and planned a programme of
modernization which applied scientific principles to domestic tasks to create
recognition, and which also scrutinized the issue of equity rights at its outside limit.
81
Pendergast (2009) maintained that “feminist poststructural theory” provided an
avenue for understanding Home Economics in its social, cultural and historical
surroundings. This theory defined the “various constructions of subject positions
without giving privilege to dominant structures which are found in patriarchal
constructs” (Pendergast, 2009, p.15). Hence the author argued that it may be possible
to locate discourse which liberates Home Economics by applying the framework of
this theory. She claimed that it was necessary to step beyond the patriarchal
structures which marginalised the subject and it was only through rejection of
male/female duality that marginalisation stopped to exist.
The above review presented different theoretical perspectives on the design, delivery
and assessment of the Home Economics curriculum. The identification of these
positions provided a framework for understanding the theoretical models and
concepts that underpin the foundation and creation of the Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore.
Teaching/Learning in Home Economics Education
This section reviews empirical studies on the teaching and learning of secondary
school Home Economics education. The selection of study was influenced by
judgements about relevance to the circumstances of Home Economics education in
Singapore. The studies derive from a variety of countries. The work does not include
any actual study directly of Home Economics in Singapore, as prior to this research
none had been carried out.
82
Shommo (1995) examined the teaching of Home Economics by a problem-solving
approach in Sudanese secondary schools for girls. Shommo’s study was aimed at
investigating a practical problem in the secondary female Home Economics
education in Sudan, namely, the absence of methods in teaching critical thinking
skills. The research method used in Shommo’s study involved collecting data on
teachers’ views about having participated in a training course on teaching problem-
solving and their experience of teaching problem-solving in their Home Economics
classes, using both semi-structured interviews and self-report Likert questionnaires.
The four sessions in-service training course in teaching problem-solving were
conducted for secondary Home Economics teachers of Omdurman in Sudan. The 16
teachers attending the course were trained in the planning and implementation of this
problem-solving approach. The focus of the course was on fostering positive
approaches to teaching problem-solving rather than simply eliminating the traditional
methods.
Shommo (1995) argued that because a large majority of Sudanese Home Economics
teachers had never been professionally trained, many were still utilising traditional
methods of teaching. Moreover, there was a complete omission on the provision of
in-service training programme for secondary Home Economics teachers with respect
to the improvement of their teaching methods. He claimed it was not possible that the
teaching of critical thinking skills could be implemented unless the Sudanese Home
Economics teachers received full professional training in this area. The author
indicated that the problem-solving approach was advocated by two American Home
Economics educationists, Dewald-Link and Wallace (1983), to help students in
learning both basic Home Economics and critical thinking skills. This problem-
83
solving approach consisted of six stages, namely: identifying the problem;
interpreting the problem; listing the alternatives; selecting the best solution;
implementing the decision; and evaluating the consequences.
The findings from Shommo’s study revealed the teachers’ positive attitudes towards
the training course and the use of problem-solving methods in their classes. The
teachers provided evidence of high gain in their students’ learning of Home
Economics lessons taught by problem-solving. They also expressed their strong
desire for further training in this area and indicated the urgent need for a well-
developed Home Economics curriculum which emphasised on the central role of
teaching problem-solving. Shommo (1995) highlighted that the most important
resource in the development of secondary Home Economics education was the
teacher in the classroom, and that therefore of special importance was the quality of
training received by the teacher. Since the findings confirmed that there was an
urgent need for in-service training for large groups of Home Economics teachers, the
author suggested various means to provide training courses for these teachers on a
large scale. These ways included sending master trainers to train teachers in their
own regions to save on time and effort in travelling, and the development of
materials on teaching critical thinking skills which could be distributed to the
teachers for ready use.
The value of Shommo’s study for this research was that it highlighted the importance
of teaching Home Economics by the problem-solving approach, which was also the
pedagogical approach adopted by the 2014 FCE syllabus. (According to the FCE
syllabus guidelines (CPDD 2013), the learning experience would enable students to
84
develop critical thinking, problem-solving and creativity, a spirit of enterprise,
innovation, and aesthetic awareness; to make informed and discerning food- and
consumer-related decisions.) Shomo’s suggestions on various ways to provide large-
scale training for Home Economics teachers was also regarded as useful to my study,
as the suggestions could be viable in the Singapore context.
Mimbs (2005) examined the professional development efforts in a large, Midwestern
American state. These efforts were intended to enhance teachers’ use of a critical
thinking, problem-based curricular approach in Family and Consumer Sciences
(FCS). The purpose of Mimb’s study was to interpret the FCS teacher leaders’
perceptions of their success in modelling and teaching from the critical thinking and
problem-based perspectives, examine their perceived challenges in implementing the
new approach, and make recommendations for the future. The research method used
in Mimb’s study involved data collection from a group of 25 FCS teacher leaders
who had self-selected to continue in professional development workshop sessions
that incorporated critical thinking and problem-solving skills into their classrooms.
At the workshop follow-up sessions in fall 2000 and spring 2001, the participants’
written responses to four open-ended questions on the following issues were
collected: teachers’ perceptions of the reasons for teaching critical thinking; the
roles, attributes, and challenges of the process; and the classroom environment and
resources needed to be effective. In addition, the participants also completed a
mailed questionnaire in 2002 to determine how well they have met their goals.
Mimbs (2005) argued that critical thinking and problem-based perspectives were the
focus in the ethical action curriculum model for teaching FCS. Teaching critical
85
thinking skills to students required teachers to be competent in using higher order
thinking skills themselves. According to Mimbs (2005), FCS teachers had been
learning, practising, and modelling the critical thinking, problem-based curricular
approach for some time. The ultimate goal was to have students use critical thinking
by identifying recurring problems of life, acting to solve these issues, and
transferring their learning to make appropriate and responsible decisions in their
daily lives.
The findings from Mimbs’s study revealed that teaching critical skills empowered
students to take ownership in life and helped them appreciate others and their
opinions, that it created an interactive and student-oriented classroom environment,
and that resources needed for the approach were readily available. Teachers were
successful with the approach and the benefits seemed to outweigh the challenges.
Mimbs (2005) maintained that the recommendations as outcomes of this study
included:
teachers needed a solid understanding of the critical thinking, problem-
solving approach and the value it had for themselves and their students;
teachers needed to think critically and model and practice the techniques
consistently with students;
teachers needed support and continued professional development in critical
thinking, problem-solving approaches.
Mimbs’s study helped locate my research in the area of pedagogy for the Home
Economics curriculum because the critical thinking, problem-based approach used in
the teaching of FCS as reported in the study was also utilised by the 2014 FCE
86
syllabus. The justifications being the same as those discussed in the earlier study by
Shommo (1995), which also focussed on the problem-solving approach. In addition,
Mimb’s findings were also relevant to my research focus on the key issues and
concerns of Home Economics teachers implementing the curriculum in schools. The
FCS teachers’ perceptions of their success and challenges in implementing the
critical thinking, problem-based curricular approach were described in this study.
This provided an understanding to issues that could confront Home Economics
teachers using the same approach in delivering the FCE syllabus. The
recommendations put forward by Mimbs (2005) in the study were also valuable to
my work as they contributed to an understanding of the kind of support and training
Home Economics teachers in Singapore may require when implementing this
approach in the FCE syllabus.
Hirose (2011) surveyed high school FCS teachers on their use of technology to teach
higher order thinking skills (HOTS). The purpose of Hirose’s study was to
investigate whether FCS teachers felt sufficiently supported by their school in the use
of technology and if they felt they had received enough technology training to
instruct their students. This study determined if teachers had financial support, time
to plan, computers, technology training, and confidence as they applied technology
to teach HOTS. For the research methodology in Hirose’s study, a modified version
of the survey instrument ‘Technology Survey for Family and Consumer Sciences
Teacher Educators’ was used to collect data from the participants via the online
Survey Monkey. Potential participants were 491 FCS teachers from every high
school in the Northern Illinois region that offered a FCS curriculum. They were
surveyed about their level of support in terms of money, time to plan, and computers,
87
and their training and confidence level in relation to technology. In the end, a total of
172 participants provided complete survey results, indicating a 37% return rate.
Hirose (2011) maintained that technology was used in a variety of ways in the field
of FCS, especially as the areas of study were so varied. The ability to apply
technology to teach HOTS was expected of FCS teachers upon entering the field.
Specific technology skills were also expected of high school students. According to
Hirose (2011), the results from the survey revealed that 89% of teachers were using
technology to teach HOTS and were sufficiently supported and trained. There was a
significant correlation between teacher’s confidence with their ability to use
technology in the classroom and their self-reported skill level. Furthermore, if
teachers did not feel comfortable using particular software, they did not expect their
students to use that software either.
Hirose’s study was relevant to my research because of the emphasis on engaging
ICT. The current education trend drives the use of technology to prepare students for
the knowledge-based economy of the 21st Century. The IFHE has also proposed that
Home Economics education should make use of the opportunities which digital
learning offers and make appropriate use of technology to support new ways of
teaching and learning (IFHE, 2009). Within this context, the Home Economics
curriculum promoted the use of technology in the teaching of the subject, which
concurred with the research topic in Hirose’s study. In addition, Hirose (2011)
identified that teachers equipped with better technology skills were more confident in
using technology in class. This was useful to my research with regard to the training
of Home Economics teachers.
88
Ma and Pendergast (2011) investigated the current positioning of Home Economics
in Hong Kong through examining the history and development of the subject in the
country. Their study aimed to reflect on the history, provide an understanding of the
contemporary, and used this to look ahead to the preferred future of the Home
Economics profession. The authors reported that there had been a renewed interest in
the historical roots of Home Economics globally. In Hong Kong, the history of Home
Economics spans over 60 years, with the origins dating back to the mid twentieth
century.
According to Ma and Pendergast (2011), the subject was first introduced to the
school curriculum as ‘Domestic Science’, with the aim of educating girls in scientific
management of the home. As the nation prospered and developed over the years, the
subject underwent a series of syllabi revisions and name changes. From Domestic
Science, it was renamed ‘Domestic Subject’ in the late 1950s, followed by ‘Home
Economics’ in 1975. The subject remained primarily as a female only course of
study until 2000 where it was offered to both boys and girls in co-educational
schools. In 2009, it was renamed and repurposed as ‘Technology and Living’. Under
this (its current) name, the subject aimed to promote effective resources management
and the wellbeing of individuals, families and societies through the study of issues
related to food or clothing.
Ma and Pendergast (2011) pointed out that, despite these aims, the implementation of
the syllabus in schools generally remained technical in orientation, with little
evidence of interpretative and emancipator practice. They argued that without the
89
addition of interpretative and emancipator practice, the technical approach was
inadequate for dealing with the complexity of family problems. They also regarded
the subject name change as mainly a cosmetic change to reflect the larger political
and education agenda of the time, as there had been little change to the fundamental
framework and conceptual foundations of the curriculum.
Ma and Pendergast (2011) also highlighted contemporary problems facing the Home
Economics profession in Hong Kong. One key problem concerned Home Economics
professionalism. Issues identified included: noticeable fragmentation in the
profession as teachers did not identify with the field; teachers focussing only on
cooking or sewing while neglecting other issues in the curriculum; and passive
teacher-directed learning which focussed on product-based outcomes and practical
work. Another key problem the authors found was the low status of the subject as
perceived by the community. Views included that Home Economics was: useless as
students could not pursue it at the tertiary level; associated with providing education
for the lower ability and underachieving students; not being offered as a compulsory
subject in the secondary curriculum. Other key challenges included gender
imbalance, as limited number of boys studied the subject, and difficulties
encountered by teachers in using Chinese reference books and textbooks due to
political changes. Hence, the authors indicated that much work had to be done to
reverse the conceptual foundations, the curriculum and the availability of teacher
educational opportunities. They suggested rethinking the curriculum to encompass
the wider intent of the study of Home Economics as interpreted by world leading
professional organisations, such as the IFHE.
90
Ma and Pendergast’s study was useful to my study because the findings drew
attention to the need to frame questions to my participants asking for their
perspectives on their subject’s identity and status, on teacher training opportunities,
on teaching approaches and professionalism and on gender matters. Moreover, as the
curriculum development process undertaken by the MOE involves studying the
Home Economics curriculum framework of other countries including Hong Kong, it
was regarded as important to the study to understand the curriculum transformation
and current condition of Home Economics education in Hong Kong.
Lai and Lum (2012) reported on an action research study using wiki as a course
platform for teaching and learning Home Economics. Their study aimed to
investigate how wikis can be used to support the teaching and learning of Home
Economics, and to discover online learning activities that were suitable for teaching
specific Home Economics topics. The three research questions were:
1. What kind of wiki-based learning activities could be used to facilitate the
teaching and learning of Home Economics?
2. Could wikis enhance both peer and student-teacher interactions?
3. Could wikis provide a collaborative platform for teaching Home Economics
in secondary school?
Lai and Lum (2012) conducted their study in a Hong Kong secondary school with
participants from a class of 32 secondary one students. A participating teacher used
Google Sites to develop a course wiki for the topic of making western desserts and
pastries. This free wiki service enabled the building of a collaborative website which
could be used by both students and teachers to communicate freely and
91
instantaneously. People without any knowledge of web design could create relatively
simple sites quickly and easily using this service.
Lai and Lum (2012) observed that this action research study had three research
cycles, each one including four stages; plan, action, observation and reflection. In
each cycle of the study, the teacher designed, implemented and evaluated the
instructional design supported by Web 2.0 technology. The plan stage consisted of
some form of intervention strategy. The introduction of the wiki learning site was the
major intervention in the first cycle. In each subsequent cycle the plan was revised
according to the findings of the previous cycle. Refined intervention strategies in the
second cycle included discussion of post-lesson questions and sharing of recipes on
the course wiki. Refined intervention strategies in the third cycle included self- and
peer-assessment of learning and sharing of video-recording of the practical lessons
on the course wiki. Pertinent observations were collected in various forms as the wiki
was being used as a learning platform. A focus group interview for students was also
arranged to examine their views on the new instructional design. The teacher also
reflected in depth on the following aspects: teacher’s preparation; students’
technology competency; assessment strategies; classroom teaching and practical
lesson; students’ participation in wiki-based learning activities; technical concern;
internet access after the school; and support from parents.
Lai and Lum (2012) observed that rapid developments of Web 2.0 had led to the
evolution of many web-based communities and hosted services, including wikis,
blogs, podcasts and social networking sites. They (2012) claimed these tools
provided an excellent resource for educators, with the potential to enhance education
92
by offering an exciting opportunity to create a classroom without walls. Their study
was a response to a teacher’s observation that dessert recipes used in a Home
Economics lesson were too wordy. The view was that the teacher had to spend a lot
of time describing the cooking procedure in class, as the students felt bored and were
reluctant to read the recipes properly. In view of this, the teacher tried to improve
his/her teaching effectiveness by using a free wiki service to supplement traditional
classroom teaching. This approach was used to enhance interactions between the
students and to improve students’ learning outcomes. Furthermore, the teacher also
attempted to integrate assessment activities into the wiki-based learning platform.
The findings from Lai and Lum’s study supported the idea that wikis could provide a
convenient platform for teaching Home Economics in secondary school. It was
found, too, that the course wiki also helped to enhance students’ learning in Home
Economics. Lai and Lum (2012) argued that this platform provided a good means to
facilitate sharing of resources, communication and collaboration. Students were able
to master collaboration and organisational skills through wiki-based activities and
peer-learning. Hence, the study observed, it was timely for teachers to lead schools in
integrating ICT into teaching and learning. However, due to the constraints of time
and students’ experience, the intervention strategies might not be able to show the
power of wikis in collaborative authoring. This study also indicated that the teacher
should possess some basic ICT skills if a wiki was to be used as a learning platform,
and that the teacher’s workload was increased by this usage. The findings also
suggested that a basic level of technological competency and adequate support from
parents were also crucial factors for students’ success. Lai and Lum (2012) expected
93
that the findings of the study would serve as a reference for other teachers in the
same subject area.
Lai and Lum’s study was relevant to my research because it demonstrated how web-
based learning platform could be integrated into the teaching and learning of a
specific Home Economics topic. In Singapore, implementation of the Home
Economics curriculum must incorporate the use of ICT. It was also noted in the study
that the teacher had to possess basic ICT skills and the workload of the teacher was
increased when using this approach, which helped add to an understanding of the
kinds of issues that Home Economics teachers in Singapore might have when they
used ICT in their teaching.
Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) investigated the redefining and repackaging of Home
Economics in Malta. Their study aimed to examine the historical developments of
Home Economics in Malta, and to provide insights into the situation of Home
Economics in the Maltese education system and society. With regard to the research
methodology, Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) based their arguments on several sources
that included local research undertaken in Home Economics education (Mugliett,
2009), discussions during professional development meetings with teachers,
feedback from students teachers, and informal observations when conducting visits
in schools.
Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) argued that as Home Economics had been developing,
transforming and reshaping across the world, Home Economics in Malta was also
subjected to this evolution. The authors presented an account on the history of Home
94
Economics in Malta, indicating how the subject had gone through various name
changes. They also outlined the features of Home Economics courses and curricula at
different levels of the Maltese education system, and discussed the philosophy,
vision and theories which informed Home Economics education in Malta. They
maintained that these theories were mostly positivist, where the information which
was disseminated was factual and scientifically based. They claimed the Home
Economics syllabus in Malta should adopt the constructivist learning theory or
approaches (CLA), which focussed on active learning through problem-solving and
decision making. In this approach, personal growth was promoted through
experiential hands-on learning and practical experiences, which in turn supported
students in developing knowledge and skills in the use of resources such as
technology. Hence, with this approach, the subject could lend itself to the integration
of ICT and teachers needed to support such a move. However they found that
teachers were not conscious of CLA or of the constructivist approach. The study
found that very few teachers were planning for learning experiences which were
effectively constructivist.
In addition, Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) also reported on how the Home Economics
teacher training programme in Malta has developed and how the profession
continued to grow and reach out through the formation of a professional association
known as Home Economists in Action or HEiA. According to the authors, this
association was very active in promoting Home Economics as an essential school
subject and had lobbied the government to explain the benefits of a Home Economics
education. The study found that Home Economics professionals were also
systematically contributing to health and consumer education through a specialised
95
Home Economics Seminar Centre. Moreover, a number of Home Economics
professionals were using the mass media (including TV, radio, newspaper and
magazine articles, and books) and the internet to disseminate Home Economics
knowledge and skills, as well as to enhance public awareness of what Home
Economics was all about. Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) determined that all the effort
had given rise to an improved status and positioning of the Home Economics
discipline and profession in Malta.
A conclusion drawn from Piscopo and Mugliett’s study was that Home Economics
professionals in Malta were enthusiastic and proud of their discipline. They
understood the need to change school syllabi, teacher training programmes and
professional development opportunities according to societal trends, emerging family
lifestyles and research on effective pedagogy, while maintaining the focus on the
wellbeing of individuals, families and communities. Synergistically these efforts
were leaving a positive impact, especially with regard to public acknowledgement
and appreciation of the Home Economics profession. However, according to the
authors, more work had to be done to further: enhance the public image of the
discipline; ensure that all teachers adopted a student-centred and constructive
approach in class; and facilitate the integration of Home Economics as a subject for
all levels of compulsory schooling.
The account of the historical developments of Home Economics in Malta in Piscopo
and Mugliett’s study provided a useful basis for a comparison with the Singapore
context. There were, for example, similarities in that the Home Economics
curriculum had evolved with societal changes and by addressing the needs of the
96
time, including the several changes in the subject name that took place in both
countries. This study was also useful to my research because it highlighted the
importance of engaging CLA and integrating ICT in the teaching and learning of
Home Economics, matters applicable to the situation in Singapore. Furthermore, the
review on how the Maltese Home Economics professionals actively promoted the
subject through their professional association, their specialised centre and the mass
media, and that this promotion contributed to an improved standing for Home
Economics was useful for this study when contemplating recommendations to
address the challenges.
Home Economics Teachers’ Perspectives on Curriculum/Delivery
This section reviews empirical studies that examine teachers’ viewpoints on the
Home Economics curriculum and curriculum delivery, literature of direct relevance
to the second stage of the study.
The Home Economics Institute of Australia (HEIA) has been a pioneer in using
teacher perspectives as a basis for improvement to curriculum and delivery (and a
range of related teaching/learning issues). For example, in 2002, the HEIA reported
on the research project ‘Home Economics in Queensland schools, 2000’ conducted
by the Queensland Division of the Institute. This study was aimed at establishing
whether the following issues regarding Home Economics education were widespread
across Queensland and at providing recommendations to address these issues. The
issues were: the position of Home Economics in the key learning areas; class sizes;
facilities; teacher-aide support; time allocation; professional development; student
97
access to resources; and beginning teachers. The research method used in this study
involved a structured seven-page quantitative and qualitative survey questionnaire
that was sent to all Queensland high schools. A total of 138 responses were received
for the survey.
The HEIA (2002) maintained that in the period leading up to and including year
2000, the Institute became increasingly aware of a range of issues associated with
Home Economics education in Queensland schools. These issues included:
the role of Home Economics in the ‘Health and Physical Education’ key
learning area;
time allocated to Home Economics;
facilities to meet the demands of the curriculum;
class sizes for practical lessons;
student access to resources required for practical lessons;
support from teacher-aide;
professional development for Home Economics teachers;
competency of beginning teachers.
These issues were raised anecdotally by Home Economics educators at various
network meetings, and cited in a letter written by a group of Home Economics
teachers.
The findings from the HEIA’s study indicated that there were great differences in the
way Home Economics was offered in different Queensland schools, and in the
structures that supported the teaching and learning of the subject. The study found
that some schools were offering a curriculum that laid the foundations for success for
98
all students and provided access to Home Economics education for the full range of
students; and some teachers were provided with excellent support to maintain and
enhance their good programmes. However, the study also found that not all schools
had such great programmes and not all teachers had the support they needed to
operate good programmes. Specific responses to each issue included:
in some school schools Home Economics was not recognised as a legitimate
stakeholder in the ‘Health and Physical Education’ key learning area;
the introduction of key learning area syllabi raised concerns with respect to
time allocation;
learning should not be put in jeopardy because of poor facilities;
concerns were experienced relating to special needs students, including safety
issues, teacher attention diverted from the rest of class, disadvantage to other
students, and making teaching difficult;
some teachers were sensitive to the need for students to retain their dignity if
they were not able to provide the resources;
appropriate teacher-aide time made a big difference to the working day of
Home Economics teachers;
increasing reluctance for professional development to be in teachers’ own
time;
placing beginning teachers in schools where there was at least one other
teacher with the subject area expertise.
The issues identified in the HEIA study served this study by providing good focus
points for the interviews with teachers. Although the samples in the HEIA study
included all the high schools in Queensland, there was no attempt to differentiate the
99
responses from different types of schools. The study reported in this thesis
specifically included Home Economics teachers from the different types of
secondary schools in Singapore and responses were differentiated according to types
of schools. Thus this study drew on the HEIA’s work, but also advanced an
understanding that different school types may lead to different approaches in
delivering the Home Economics curriculum and to differing perspectives on the
curriculum.
A major international study of Home Economics teachers’ viewpoints was carried
out by Dewhurst and Pendergast (2008). They conducted a cross-cultural
comparative study that aimed at exploring Home Economics teachers’ level of
agreement with the propositions in the ‘IFHE Position Statement 2008 - Home
Economics in the 21st Century’ (IFHE, 2008). For Dewhurst and Pendergast’s study,
a survey comprising nine extracts taken verbatim from the text of the Position Paper,
along with four general questions about Home Economics, was administered.
Respondents completed a Likert scale response to indicate the extent of their
agreement or disagreement with the extracts, and had the opportunity to add
extended comments. The survey was administered to a convenience sample in the
cultural contexts of Scotland and Australia. In Scotland, it was administered to a
convenience sample of delegates attending the 2007 National Home Economics
Conference, there were 220 responses. In Australia, the same survey was
administered to a convenience sample of teachers attending a conference in July
2007. There were 44 responses. Hence a total of 264 responses were gathered from
both countries.
100
Dewhurst and Pendergast (2008) observed that as the IFHE was the only global
institution representing the profession of Home Economics, broader educational
reforms taking place in countries around the world provided the IFHE with an
opportunity to re-vision Home Economics. Hence, the IFHE Position Paper
attempted to locate the profession in that context by serving as a platform, looking
ahead to viable and progressive visions of Home Economics for the 21st Century and
beyond. Within such a climate of change, this study investigated the views of Home
Economics teachers. Their views offered valuable insights into the degree of
connection the Position Paper made with them, highlighting areas that may require
further work by the IFHE, such as re-branding and repositioning the profession.
Dewhurst and Pendergast’s study included a cross-cultural comparison of the
findings which identified similarities and differences, revealing a high level of
agreement with many of the extracts, both within and across cultures. According to
the authors, some of these extracts included: Home Economics was multidisciplinary
and situated in the human sciences; Home Economics prepared individuals for their
personal and professional lives; Home Economics was a practice area for everyday
living; and there was a wide disciplinary base from which to draw the content of
Home Economics. However, there was lack of agreement in some extracts,
particularly with the retention of Home Economics as the preferred name for the field
and the commitment to re-brand and reposition the profession. The survey findings
led to recommendations to extend the research to Africa, Asia and the Americas, and
to build professional learning communities with a special focus on engaging Home
Economics teachers.
101
As Dewhurst and Pendergast’s study dealt with the re-visioning of Home Economics
in the international context for the 21st Century, it offered an understanding of the
nature of broad influences that may have impacted on the formulation of the Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore in this century. Furthermore, the authors’
recommendation on engaging Home Economics teachers to build professional
learning communities was also useful to this research, supporting the interpretivist
and perspective oriented methodology employed in the study. Dewhurst and
Pendergast (2008) argued that teachers were the ‘front liners’ in implementing any
education policy, and therefore their involvement and perspectives should be prized.
The study reported here absorbed and embraced this argument.
Another important contribution to the literature on teacher perspectives was made by
Arnett (2012). Arnett investigated the problems encountered by beginning FCS
teachers who had taught for four or fewer years in Illinois, America. The main
objective of Arnett’s study was to identify and categorise a list of problems
encountered by FCS teachers during their first year in the education profession. The
research method engaged an online questionnaire consisting of one open-ended
question that asked respondents to describe two problems they encountered as
beginning teachers in FCS. A total of 90 respondents completed the questionnaire
and the responses were reviewed and placed in categories. Analysis of the findings
revealed four major themes and individual subthemes.
Arnett (2012) reported that the four themes which emerged from the analysis were
student management, facility management, instruction management, and external
relations. With respect to the first theme of student management, the predominant
102
subthemes were discipline and student motivation, examples of responses included
“students blatantly not following directions”, “students don’t seem to want to learn”
and “how do you motivate uninspired students”. The second theme of facility
management involved the subthemes of facilities and equipment, and budget and
funding. Examples of responses included “not enough equipment to go around”,
“out-of-date equipment” and “how to extend the budget to allow more learning”. The
third theme of instruction management involved the subthemes of curriculum
(content, lesson planning, teaching strategies), multiple class preparations, time
management, and lab management. Examples of responses included “expected to
teach in all areas of FCS but not having prior knowledge/experience”, “only taking
one food course in college and having to teach an entire course”, “I feel
overwhelmed with my teaching load”, “too much to do and not enough time”, and
“getting food lab done within 42 minute periods”. The fourth theme of external
relations involved the subthemes of image and administrative support. Examples of
responses included “FCS is not taken seriously or valued by colleagues”, “lack of
administrative support”, and “lack of communication”.
The value of Arnett’s findings for this study was, again, focus points for interviews
with teacher participants.
Conclusion
This chapter reviewed literature relevant to the study reported here in three sections.
The first section examined how the concepts of ‘curriculum’ and ‘Home Economics
curriculum’ have been considered, discussed and debated in the literature. That the
103
concepts of the curriculum and the Home Economics curriculum are not fixed and
are subject to evaluative debates made it important to examine what concepts have
informed and do inform the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. This is the
subject, in particular, of the first stage of the study reported here, the history of the
development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore.
The literature on Home Economics education served to locate the study reported in
this thesis by establishing current understandings and challenges in respect to matters
central to this study, including findings relating to curriculum design,
teaching/learning approaches, professional development, historical development and
models of delivery.
The literature review of teacher perspectives on curriculum and curriculum delivery
revealed a wide array of issues that served as focus points for interviews with the
participants in this study.
The next chapter of the thesis, Chapter Four, describes and justifies the theoretical
framework and research methodology of this study.
104
CHAPTER FOUR
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes and justifies the research design, research methods and the
theoretical foundations adopted in this study. There are seven main sections in this
chapter. The first section delineates the research questions which guided the study.
The second section outlines the research design and defines the theoretical
framework underpinning the chosen design. The third section discusses the sample
and sampling strategy used in the study. The fourth and fifth sections describe the
methods of data collection and data analysis respectively. The sixth section reviews
the strategies used to establish the trustworthiness of the study. The last section
addresses the ethical issues concerned with the study.
Research Questions
This study was undertaken to examine the history and current developments in the
secondary school Home Economics curriculum in Singapore, along with
understandings of key issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers teaching
this subject in schools. To address these aims, three specific research questions were
developed.
First Research Question: What was the history of the secondary school Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore from the country’s independence in 1965 to
2008?
Guiding questions:
105
1. What were the influences that generated the creation and implementation of
curricula associated with Home Economics in Singapore from 1965 to 2008?
2. What were the continuities between the different curricula implemented from
1965 to 2008?
3. What were the changes between the different curricula implemented from
1965 to 2008?
Second Research Question: What developments have taken place with regard to the
secondary school Home Economics curriculum in Singapore from 2008 to 2014?
Guiding questions:
1. What were the influences that generated the creation of the 2014 Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore?
2. What were the continuities between the 2008 and 2014 curricula?
3. What were the changes between the 2008 and 2014 curricula?
Third Research Question: What were the issues and concerns of Home Economics
teachers regarding the teaching of Home Economics in Singaporean secondary
schools?
Guiding questions:
1. What were the intentions of the Home Economics teachers with regard to the
Home Economics curriculum? What reasons did they give for these
intentions?
2. What strategies did the Home Economics teachers use to achieve these
intentions? What reasons did they give for selecting these strategies?
106
3. What was the significance of these intentions and strategies for the Home
Economics teachers? What reasons did they give for the significance which
they attribute to these intentions and strategies?
4. What outcomes did the Home Economics teachers expect from pursuing their
intentions? What reasons did they give for these expected outcomes?
Research Design
Research design reveals how the research questions will be connected to the data,
and what tools and procedures to use in answering them (Punch, 2009). It is the basic
plan for a piece of research that is based on strategy and framework, which shows
who or what will be studied, and demonstrates how data will be collected and
analysed. Hence, design needs to follow from the research questions and fit in with
the data. According to Punch (2009), design must be driven by the strategy, which is
the logic of the approach by which the data will be used to answer the research
questions. The design that the researcher chooses will implement that strategy.
In this study, the three research questions required two different approaches in the
strategy. It was judged that both the ‘historical research’ approach (Wiersma & Jurs,
2005) and ‘interpretivist research’ approach (O’Donoghue, 2007) should be adopted
for the research design. For data collection, the methods of document study and
interviews were utilised. The documentary data was analysed using the approach of
content analysis, while the interview transcripts were analysed using the Miles and
Huberman Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis (Mile & Huberman, 1994), as
described later in this chapter.
107
The study was carried out in two stages, the first stage to develop a history of the
curriculum and the second stage to identify the concerns and issues of teachers
delivering the 2014 curriculum, the existing curriculum at the time of the study.
Stage One applied to the first and second research questions, which were addressed
through the historical research approach which is discussed later in this chapter. This
stage called for the collecting, describing and analysing of data contained in a range
of public and official documents, to develop an understanding how the curriculum
had developed over its history. To supplement the existing documentary data, oral
histories were gathered from individuals who were involved in curriculum design or
delivery.
Stage Two applied to the third research question, which was addressed through the
interpretivist research approach, described later in this chapter. Interviews with
Home Economics teachers were carried out to understand their issues (challenges)
and concerns (priorities) in delivering the curriculum. Participants were selected
across the different types of secondary schools in Singapore, on the understanding
that the school type could affect the approach to implementing the syllabus. Overall,
this research design enabled an inquiry into the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore through the investigations of these three interrelated areas:
history of the Home Economics curriculum; recent developments in the Home
Economics curriculum and; key issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers in
respect to the 2014 curriculum. An overview of the research design is presented in
Table 1.
108
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Research Questions Research Design Sampling Strategy Data Collection Data Analysis
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
What was the history of the secondary school Historical research Documents Document study Content analysis
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore from (Stage One) Relevant Interviews Miles and Huberman Framework
the country’s independence in 1965 to 2008? stakeholders (oral histories) for Qualitative Data Analysis
What developments have taken place with regard Historical research Documents Document study Content analysis
to the secondary school Home Economics (Stage One) Relevant Interviews Miles and Huberman Framework
curriculum in Singapore from 2008 to2014? stakeholders (oral histories) for Qualitative Data Analysis
What were the issues and concerns of Home Interpretivist research Home Interviews Miles and Huberman Framework
Economics teachers regarding the teaching of Home (Stage Two) Economics (one-to-one: 18 teachers) for Qualitative Data Analysis
Economics in Singaporean secondary schools? teachers (focus group: 6 teachers)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table 1. An Overview of the Research Design
109
Theoretical framework
Historical research
The first and second research questions investigated the historical background and
developments of Home Economics curriculum in Singapore to the emergence of the
2014 curriculum. This required an approach enabling the researcher to study and
explain the meanings, phrases and characteristics of an issue at a specific point of
time in the past. Therefore, the ‘historical research’ approach was adopted, as it
facilitates the examination of past events to obtain an account of what has happened
in the past.
Historical research is based upon the identification of a need for certain historical
knowledge and generally entails gathering as much relevant information about the
topic as possible (Ellis & Levy, 2009). According to Wiersma and Jurs (2005),
historical research is a systematic process of describing, analysing, and interpreting
the past based on information from selected sources that relate to the topic under
study. Besides the effort to describe the past accurately, historical research also gives
a projection of results and interpretation onto current issues, problems or procedures.
For example, Wiersma and Jurs (2005) argued that in the context of education,
historical research deals with educational issues of some past period, but the
interpretation and implications of the results need not be limited to that period. As
the study reported in this thesis was oriented to developing a holistic view of the
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore, one key reason for selecting historical
research methodology was its capacity to project to the present.
Berg (1998) offered the following reasons for conducting historical research:
110
To uncover the unknown as some historical events are not recorded.
To answer questions regarding the past that are beneficial to the research.
To identify the relationship that the past has to the present to give a better
understanding of current events.
To record and evaluate the accomplishments of individuals, agencies, or
institutions.
To assist in understanding the culture in which we live, for example,
education as part of our culture.
Johnson and Christensen (2007) argued that historical research tends to be a rather
holistic process and does not have any highly defined methodology. Although there
is a general set of steps that are typically followed, there is considerable overlap and
movement back and forth between the steps. The first step involves the identification
of the research topic and formulation of the research problem or question. Research
topics may include current issues in education, an educational policy, or the
relationship between events. The second step involves the collection of source
materials. Sources of information include documents (for example books,
newspapers, journals, diaries, letters, et cetera), artifacts (for example pictures,
records, film, art works, equipment, et cetera) and information databases.
Wiersma and Jurs (2005) indicated that when doing research of recent history, it may
be possible to interview participants of the relevant events about their experiences.
Interviews with individuals who have knowledge of the research topic are called
‘oral histories’. This study drew on this understanding of Wiersma and Jurs (2005) to
actively utilise oral histories in its methodology.
111
According to Johnson and Christensen (2007), source materials can be classified as
primary or secondary. A primary source is the first-hand account or has a direct
involvement with the event under study while a secondary source is any account that
is not first-hand. The selection of the relevant sources is driven by the specific study,
and primary sources are more desirable than secondary sources. The third step
involves the evaluation of source materials. Once information is collected it must be
evaluated for its authenticity and accuracy. The two types of evaluations involved are
external criticism and internal criticism (Johnson & Christensen, 2007). External
criticism is the process of determining the authenticity or validity of the source.
Internal criticism is the process of determining the accuracy or reliability of the
information contained in the source. The fourth step involves the synthesis of
information. These include selecting, organising, and analysing the information
collected into topical themes and central ideas or concepts (Johnson & Christensen,
2007). These themes are then pulled together and continuity between them
developed, to form a contiguous and meaningful whole. Johnson and Christensen
(2007) concluded that the final step involves the preparation of the narrative account
for the report. In line with these ideas, this study sought out primary sources and the
history of the curriculum was created as a narrative account.
Interpretivist research
The third research question targeted the concerns and issues of Home Economics
teachers implementing the Home Economics curriculum in the different types of
secondary school. The study examined ‘concerns’, which it understood as teacher
convictions and priorities in respect to curriculum content and delivery. Essentially,
112
‘concerns’ sought to capture how the participants understood the purposes of the
curriculum. The question of ‘issues’ essentially referred to perceived challenges
thrown up by the curriculum. Since the research question sought out teachers’ views
and understandings, methodologically it made sense to utilise the interpretivist
paradigm. This was done with symbolic interactionism as the theoretical perspective.
This theoretical perspective emphasises social interaction as the basis for knowledge,
which aligns with the interpretivist view that the interaction between people is
essential to understanding meaning.
Stage Two of this study was clearly interested in uncovering meanings, impressions
and understandings that directed or justified actions. In further justification of the
research methodology, the interpretivist paradigm places primary importance on the
social meanings people attach to the world around them, and how they respond to
them (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). This approach emphasises social interaction as the
basis for knowledge, and the researcher uses his or her skills as a social being to try
to understand how others understand their world (O’Donoghue, 2007). The research
within the interpretivist paradigm seeks to investigate the everyday activity of
individuals, the freedom within such activity, and the interactions between
individuals. O’Donoghue (2007) maintained that through a process of negotiation
during these interactions, people give meaning to their own actions, as well as to the
actions of others.
Symbolic interactionism is both a theory and an approach in understanding human
behaviour through the emphasis it places on people’s interpretation of words,
symbols and meanings. It acknowledges the importance of social interaction as the
113
process in which people interpret and make meaning of things. According to Blumer
(1969), symbolic interactionism is based on three central principles:
People act toward things and other people, on the basis of the meanings these
things and people have for them;
The meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social
interaction that one has with others. This attribution of meanings to things
and people through symbols (such as signs, language, gestures, or anything
that conveys meaning) is a continuous process;
These meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretive process
used by the person in dealing with the things he or she encountered.
Woods (1992) indicated that meaning is derived from our experiences of situations,
and is constantly modified, even totally changed because we are in continual
engagement with the world around us. Hence in symbolic interactionism, the
meaning of each thing is constantly adjusted and shaped by new information, rather
than being fixed.
According to O’Donoghue (2007), symbolic interactionism allows the researcher to
unveil people’s perspectives on a phenomenon. Perspectives are frameworks through
which people make sense of the world (Woods, 1992). Blackledge and Hunt (1991)
maintained that the interrelated parts of the framework that make up a ‘perspective’
consist of:
The participants’ aims or intentions;
Strategies that they use to achieve their aims;
The significance that they attach to the situation;
The outcomes they expect from pursuing their aims;
114
The reasons they give for their aims, strategies, significance and expected
outcomes.
These components of the framework were used to generate the guiding questions that
seek to understand the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers teaching in
the different types of secondary school.
Sample and Sampling Strategy
There were three parts to the sampling strategy in this study. The first part involved
sampling of documents for the document study, the second part involved sampling of
relevant stakeholders for the oral histories, and the third part involved sampling of
Home Economics teachers delivering the 2014 curriculum for the interviews.
According to Punch (2009), the sampling strategy in qualitative research must fit in
with the other components of the study. Punch (2009) highlighted that the sample
plan and sampling parameters should conform to the purposes and the research
questions of the study to ensure the overall validity of the research design.
Miles and Huberman (1994) provided the following checklist for a qualitative
sampling plan:
Is the sampling relevant to your conceptual frame and research questions?
Will the phenomena you are interested in appear? In principle, can they
appear?
Does your plan enhance generalisation of your findings, either through
conceptual power or representativeness?
115
Can believable descriptions and explanation be produced, ones that are true to
real life?
Is the sampling plan feasible, in terms of time, money, access to people, and
your own work style?
Is the sampling plan ethical, in terms of such issues as informed consent,
potential benefits and risks, and the relationship with the informants?
The first part of the sampling strategy involved the sampling of documents to
investigate the historical background and developments of the Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore. The technique of relevance sampling was used for the
selection of the documents. Historical and contemporary documents related to the
formulation and development of the Home Economics curriculum for the period
under study were selected and utilised. According to Krippendorff (2004), relevance
sampling aims at selecting all textual units that contribute to answering the research
questions. In this form of sampling, the researcher proceeds by following a
conceptual hierarchy, systematically lowering the number of units that needs to be
considered for an analysis. Krippendorff (2004) concluded that the resulting units of
text are the population of relevant texts, excluding the textual units that do not
possess relevant information.
The second part of the sampling strategy involved the sampling of relevant
stakeholders for oral histories to supplement the existing documentary data. Oral
histories were collected from people who were involved in some way with the
development of the Home Economics curriculum at the time point of interest.
Snowball or chain sampling (Punch, 2009) was used to identify cases of interest from
116
people who know what cases were information-rich. Participants selected for the oral
histories included existing and retired Home Economics teachers and the MOE
curriculum specialists, identified through the Home Economics teachers’ network, as
well as from officials from the MOE and NIE.
The third part of the sampling strategy involved the sampling of practising Home
Economics teachers to investigate their issues and concerns in implementing the
2014 Home Economics curriculum. The technique of deliberate or purposeful
sampling was used for the selection of the teachers. Purposeful sampling implies
sampling with some purpose or specific focus in mind (Punch, 2009). According to
Patton (1990), purposeful sampling is the strategy of selecting information-rich cases
for conducting in-depth study. These information-rich cases are those from which
researchers can discover, understand and learn a great deal about the issues related to
the objectives of research.
Teachers teaching Home Economics in the secondary schools in Singapore were
invited to participate in this study. Participants were selected from the mainstream,
autonomous and independent schools. This was because different types of secondary
schools in Singapore may have different approaches in implementing the Home
Economics curriculum. For each different type of school, three schools were
selected. Within each type of school, participants came from two different categories:
teachers with less than three years of teaching experience; and teachers with more
than three years of teaching experience. This was to ensure diversity as teachers with
different years of teaching experience may have different area of issues and
concerns. In addition, three years of teaching experience was used to stratify the
117
sample because it was a reasonable period for teachers to be adept in their role. As
Home Economics is not a core subject in the education system, the number of Home
Economics teachers is usually small in a Singaporean secondary school. Due to this
situation, there was only one participant for each category. Hence there were a total
of 18 FCE teachers selected for the interviews. In respect to this number, it should be
noted that as the aim of the study was to understand human actions within a specific
cultural context, one was not obliged to work with a large number of participants
(O’Donoghue, 2007).
Data Collection According to Punch (2009), qualitative research uses multiple methods and multiple
sources of data to investigate spoken and written representations and records of
human experience. Hence, several data collection methods might be utilised in one
single research study. In this study, the two data collection methods utilised were
document study and interviews. To understand the historical background and current
developments in the Home Economics curriculum, it was necessary to review data
contained in a range of documents, supplemented by oral histories. To investigate the
issues and concerns faced by Home Economics teachers in teaching the subject, it
was valuable to understand their experiences and perspectives by carrying out
individual and focus group interviews. The data collection for this study began in
January 2014 and was completed by June 2015.
Document study
A document in its most general sense is a written text. Scott (1990) explained that
documents may be regarded as physically embodied texts, where the containment of
118
the text is the primary purpose of the physical medium. Punch (2009) maintained that
documents are a rich source of data for education and social research as educational
organisations routinely produce a vast amount of documentary data. Hence document
study was utilised in this study to inform the history and developments regarding the
Home Economics curriculum.
The range of documents used in historical research includes archival records, public
documents (such as policy documents, political speeches and newspapers),
administrative documents (such as minutes of meetings, agenda and mission
statements) and personal documents (such as oral histories, biographies,
autobiographies, diaries, letters, drawings and photographs). Scott (1990) suggested
four criteria in assessing the quality of documentary data:
Authenticity - whether it is original and genuine, and does it fit in with other
secondary sources from around the same time.
Credibility - whether it is reliable and accurate, and how do you know that the
information is undistorted and sincere.
Representativeness - whether it is representative of the totality of documents
of its class.
Meaning - whether it is clear and comprehensible, include the literal,
symbolic/intended and received meanings.
Documentary sources were utilised in this study with respect to the criteria cited by
Scott (1990).
According to May (1993), the classification of documents tends to fall into three
main groups: primary, secondary and tertiary documents; public and private
119
documents; solicited and unsolicited documents. Primary sources refer to those
materials which are written or collected by those who actually witnessed the events
which they describe. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2001) described primary sources
of data as items that are original to the topic under study and have a direct physical
relationship with the events that happened. While considered to be reliable and
accurate, such sources have to be seen in their social context. Secondary sources do
not have a direct physical relationship to the event being investigated and therefore
the data are not original. Bailey (1994) argued that they are produced by people who
were not present at the event but who received eye-witness accounts or have read
eye-witness accounts. The researcher must be aware of problems such as incomplete
or prejudice coverage in the production of this type of data. Tertiary sources enable
researchers to locate other references such as indexes, abstracts and bibliographies.
Main sites for such sources include libraries and internet search engines. Public and
private documents are divided into four categories depending on the level of their
accessibility: closed, restricted, open-archival and open-published. Solicited
documents are produced with the objective of research in mind, while unsolicited
documents are produced for personal use.
Following the arguments of Cohen et al. (2001) above, primary sources were used in
this study as far as possible, rather than on secondary sources. This was to ensure the
reliability and accuracy of the data collected. The major sources of documentary data
were from official documents, both historical and contemporary, produced by the
MOE in Singapore during the period under study. These official documents included
the MOE curriculum frameworks (for the secondary school courses) and Home
Economics syllabus guidelines, as well as MOE reports and statements. Other
120
sources of documentary data came from reports and statements published by
professional organisations, papers presented at conferences, and newspaper articles.
Access to these documents was through the MOE, NIE, National Library Board,
Association of Home Economists Singapore, Singapore Press Holdings and the
internet. The examination of these documentary materials gave insights to the policy
making, as well as the changes and developments related to the Home Economics
curriculum that took place over the relevant time frame.
Interviews
Punch (2009) maintained that the interview is a good way of accessing people’s
perceptions, meanings, definitions of situations and constructions of reality. It
provides direct access to the participants’ perspectives on their experiences expressed
in their own words, and allows greater depth than other data collection methods.
Hence interviews were utilised in this study to examine the teachers’ issues and
concerns with regard to the delivery of the Home Economics curriculum. Punch
(2009) also highlighted that the important dimensions in the variation on types of
interviews are the degree of structure in the interview, and how deep the interview
tries to go. Minichiello et al. (1990) provided a continuum model for interviews that
identifies three types of interviews: structured interviews; semi-structured interviews
and unstructured interviews. The type of interview selected for a research study
should be aligned with the research strategy, purposes and research questions. In this
study, semi-structured one-to-one and focus group interviews were employed,
considering the arguments put forth by Punch (2009) and Fontana and Frey (1994)
below.
121
Punch (2009) indicated that when using a semi-structured approach, initial questions
will be more loosely based on the data collection questions already noted, and
subsequent questions will be asked as they suggest themselves and as opportunities
arise. The nature of the response will determine which direction the interview should
head next. Semi-structured interviews enable the researcher the flexibility to respond
immediately to issues raised by the participants, asking probing questions, and to
allow participants to discuss issues considered to be important to them. In addition,
Fontana and Frey (1994) commented that semi-structured interviews diminish the
possibility of imposing prior conceptions that may limit the inquiry process.
Punch (2009) explained that in a focus group interview, the researcher works with
several participants concurrently and acts as a moderator or facilitator, rather than
being directive. It is a very good way to access people’s perceptions, meanings,
definitions of situations and constructions of reality (Punch, 2009). According to
Punch (2009), focus group interview takes the structure of collaborative thinking as
the group interaction can motivate participants to make explicit their views, motives
and reasons to produce valuable insights and data. It ensures an open, non-
threatening atmosphere for discussion and participants have the freedom to recall and
expound on events from their perspectives (Punch, 2009).
Punch (2009) indicated that after deciding on the type of interview, the practical
aspects of interviewing would then be carried out. These include the selection of
interview respondents, managing the interview and recording. Careful planning and
preparation must be done to ensure the quality, reliability and validity of the
interview data. In this study, interviews with Home Economics teachers from
122
mainstream schools, autonomous schools and independent schools were carried out
to discover and understand the issues and concerns that they faced in teaching the
subject, and the strategies that they used to deal with these issues and concerns.
Aide-memoires were developed for both the one-to-one and focus group interviews
from the study’s guiding questions. These aide-memoires or semi-structured
interview guides consisted of data collection questions with the greatest potential to
engage participants in conversation related to the guiding questions. According to
Merriam (1988), an aide-memoire will help to ensure that similar issues will be
covered in all of the interviews. And whilst providing guidance in the conducting of
the interview, the aide-memoire will still permit the kind of flexibility required for
the interviewer to respond to new ideas on the topic. These particular advantages of
the aide-memoires were apparent in this study because as the study unfolded, some
ineffective data collection questions were dropped, while other questions suggested
themselves along the way.
Teachers teaching Home Economics from the three different types of secondary
schools were invited to take part in the interviews. They were first contacted by
email to gain their interest as well as to seek their permission to participate in the
study. Approval of the teachers’ participation was also sought in writing from the
MOE and the principals of each school respectively. Thereof, each participant
received an information letter (Appendices 1 and 2) outlining the nature of the study,
their role in the study, the data collection and processing, schedule and venues for the
interviews, confidentiality arrangements, and an assurance that they could withdraw
from the study at any time of the research without prejudice. Attached with the letter
123
was a consent form (Appendix 3) to be returned to the researcher, as well as a copy
for their record. For the one-to-one interviews, participants received the interview
questions (Appendix 4) a week before the scheduled interview session to give them
sufficient time to reflect upon their experiences and prepare for the interview. There
was one interview session for each participant, which was approximately 60 minutes
in length. After carrying out the one-to-one interviews, one two-hour focus group
interview was conducted with six participants comprising one ‘new’ and one
‘experienced’ teacher from each of the three school types. The focus group interview
was used to follow up on issues raised in the individual interviews.
In addition, interviews were also conducted with relevant stakeholders with
knowledge of the historical background and developments of the Home Economics
curriculum for the period under study. Oral histories were gathered from existing and
retired Home Economics teachers and the MOE curriculum specialists. This was
undertaken to supplement the documentary data that were available.
All the interview sessions were digitally recorded using an audio recorder. Notes
were also taken by the researcher concurrently to capture elements that the audio
recorder was unable to record and which were essential in helping the researcher to
make better sense of the participants’ perspectives. Notes were taken, for example, of
their facial expressions and body language. All recordings were fully transcribed by
the researcher. The transcripts were then brought back to the participants until
agreement was reached on their substance. This process of verification was to
prevent any misinterpretations and to ensure accuracy and validity of the data.
124
Data Analysis Data analysis is the process of organising the data into patterns and categories, and
involves data reduction strategies. According to Punch (2009), there is no single
methodological framework for qualitative data analysis, due to the diversity in
methods and approaches. Nevertheless the methods used for data analysis need to be
systematic, disciplined, and able to be seen and described. Hence Punch (2009)
highlighted that it is important to compile a clear audit trail which shows how the
researcher gets from the data to the conclusions. This will ensure the quality of the
data and enhance the confidence in the findings of the study.
In this study, documentary data was analysed using the approach of content analysis,
while the interview transcripts was analysed using the Miles and Huberman
Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis. Two methods were chosen because the
Miles and Huberman approach appears particularly suited to addressing the nuances
and subtleties of conversational data, whereas content analysis appears most apposite
for document interrogation. In their main aspects, the methods are compatible as they
both focus on generating key themes through data reduction via coding. Individual
examples on how coding were applied to the documentary data and interview
transcripts are presented in Appendices 5 and 6, respectively.
Content analysis
Marshall and Rossman (2006) argued that documents need to be situated within a
theoretical frame of reference in order that their content is understood. For this
purpose, the use of documents often entails a specialised analytical approach called
content analysis. Leedy and Ormrod (2005) explained that content analysis is a
125
process in which narrative data are divided into units of analysis to examine the
contents of a particular body of material for the purpose of identifying patterns,
themes or biases. Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) elaborated further that the process
uses inductive reasoning, by which themes and categories emerge from the data
through the researcher’s careful and constant comparison. Elo and Kyngas (2007)
indicated that the aim of content analysis to attain a condensed and broad description
of the phenomenon; and the outcome of the analysis is concepts or categories
describing the phenomenon. Hence content analysis was used to analyse the
documentary data in this study following the arguments above.
In addition, Krippendorff (2004) and Marshall and Rossman (2006) highlighted the
strengths of using content analysis. According to Krippendorff (2004), content
analysis is a research technique for making replicable and valid inference from text
or other meaningful matter to the context of their use. The intention is to provide
knowledge, new insights, a representation of facts and a practical guide to action. He
identified the four strengths of content analysis: it is unobtrusive; it can handle
unstructured matter; it is context sensitive and therefore can process symbolic data;
and it can cope with large volume of data.
Marshall and Rossman (2006) maintained that the greatest strength of content
analysis is that it is unobtrusive and nonreactive. The process can be conducted
without disturbing the setting in any way as the researcher determines where the
emphasis lies after the data have been gathered. Furthermore, the procedure is
relatively clear to the reader. Therefore information can be checked, as well as the
care with which the analysis has been applied. Marshall and Rossman (2006) also
126
indicated that a potential weakness, however, is the span of inferential reasoning.
This is because the analysis of the content of written materials entails interpretation
by the researcher. Hence care should be taken in displaying the logic of interpretation
used in inferring meaning from the documents.
Krippendorff (2004) listed the components of content analysis that the researcher
needs to proceed from texts to results, as shown in Figure 5. These six components
are: utilizing, sampling, recording/coding, reducing, inferring and narrating.
Figure 5. Components of Content Analysis from Krippendorff (2004, p.86)
Utilizing is the systematic distingishing of segments of text that are of interest to an
analysis. The different units of analysis include sampling units, recording units and
context units. Sampling enables observations to be reduced to a manageable subset of
units that is conceptually representative of the set of all possible units or the
population. Recording/coding involves transforming raw data into durable records
and analyzable representations. Reducing relies on using established methods to
127
summarise or simplify data to manageable representations. Inferring bridges the gap
between descriptive account of texts and what they mean, relying on analytical
constructs or models of the chosen context as warrants. Narrating provides the
answer to the research question by making the results comprehensible to the readers.
Together, the first four components constitute data making or creating computable
data from raw or unedited texts.The fifth component is unique to content analysis
and goes beyond the representational attributes of data. As an example, with
reference to Appendix 5, these processes were applied on the “Rationale and Value
of Subject” section in the 2014 Food and Consumer Education Syllabus document.
Themes such as “responding to consumerism” and “inquiry-base learning” were
identified as valuable achievements, and responded to the second research question
about developments in the contemporary Home Economics curriculum.
Analysis of the documentary data in this study was guided by the steps identified by
Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) for qualitative content analysis. Zhang and Wildemuth
(2009) explained that to support valid and reliable inferences, content analysis has to
involve a set of systematic and transparent procedures for processing data. Step one
of the analysis began with the preparation of the data through identifying, locating
and gathering the relevant documents from the various organisations and other
sources available. Kripendorff (2004) pointed out that creating representative sample
for content analysis is far more complex than creating samples for other types of
research, as the content can be understood at different levels, for example level of
words, sentences or paragraphs. However Robson (1993) addressed that researchers
will be guided by the aim and research questions of the study in choosing the content
128
they analyse. Therefore a well-formulated research question can prevent aimless
exercises in data collection.
Step two involved defining the unit that represents the information for analysis, or
the basic unit of text to be classified. According to Zhang (2005), information has to
be unitized before it can be coded, hence the operation definition of the unit of
analysis should be clear-cut and thorough. Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) indicated
that individual themes are usually used as the unit for qualitative content analysis. A
theme might be expressed in a single word, a phrase, a sentence, a paragraph, or an
entire document. Minichiello et al. (1990) explained that the researcher is primarily
looking for the expression of an idea when using theme as the coding unit. A code
might be assign to a text chunk of any size, as long as the chunk represents a single
theme of relevance to the research questions.
Step three was to develop categories and a coding scheme by which the data could be
validly and reliably classified. Weber (1990) defined ‘category’ as a group of words
with similar meaning or connotations. A good category should be mutually
exclusive, exhaustive, and reliable (Wimmer & Dominick, 2002). Tesch (1990)
maintained that qualitative content analysis allows the researcher to assign a unit of
text to more than one category simultaneously. According to Weber (1990),
problems of reliability usually grow out of the ambiguity of word meaning, category
definitions, or other coding rules. In order to make valid inferences from the text, it is
important that the classification procedure be reliable, in the sense of being
consistent. Different people should be able to code the same text in the same way.
Hence a coding manual was developed to ensure consistency of coding. The manual
129
generally consisted of category names, definitions or rules for assigning codes, and
examples. The manual also evolved throughout the process of data analysis, and
enhanced with the generation of interpretive memos.
Step four involved testing the coding scheme on a sample of the data to ensure the
clarity and consistency of the category definitions. According to Zhang (2005), this
step is used to check on the inter-coder reliability or the degree of agreement among
coders, if more than one coder is engaged in the coding process. Weber (1990)
commented that coding sample text, checking coding consistency and revising
coding rules is an iterative process and should continue until sufficient coding
consistency is achieved.
Step five was to carry out the coding of all the text, adhering to the coding rules.
Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) indicated that as coding proceeds while new data is
still being collected, it is possible that new themes and concepts will emerge that can
be added to the coding manual.
Step six involved assessing the coding consistency again after the entire data set has
been coded. Miles and Huberman (1994) explained that coders’ understanding of the
categories and coding rules may change subtly over the time, which may lead to
greater inconsistency.
Step seven was to draw conclusions from the coded data by making sense of the
themes or categories identified, and their properties. Bradley (1993) highlighted that
this step involves exploring the properties and dimensions of categories, identifying
130
relations between categories, uncovering patterns, and testing categories against the
full range of data. Step eight or the final step ended with reporting the methods and
findings, which included the analytical procedures and practices concerning the
coding process to ensure that the study is replicable. Zhang and Wildemuth (2009)
maintained that through careful data preparation, coding and interpretation, the
results from content analysis can provide thick descriptions of the topic under study.
Miles and Huberman Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis
The interview transcripts were analysed following the Miles and Huberman (1994)
Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis, as shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Components of Data Analysis: Interactive Model from Miles and
Huberman (1994, p.12)
Miles and Huberman (1994) labelled their approach ‘transcendental realism’, and
maintained their interactive model offers a systematic approach to collecting,
organising and analysing data. They defined data analysis as consisting of three
concurrent flows of activity: data reduction, data display and drawing and verifying
conclusions. Data reduction seeks to edit and simplify the data, and it rests mainly on
the operations of coding and memoing. Data display enables data to be organised
131
and summarised. It involves mapping of categories into a simplified, compact form.
Drawing and verifying conclusions aims to integrate what has been done into a
meaningful and coherent picture of the data. It seeks to offer propositions about the
emerging themes. These three components are interwoven and occur concurrently
throughout the data analysis (Punch, 2009). As an example, the application of these
processes was illustrated in Appendix 6. Themes such as “teaching/learning of life
skills” and “need to eliminate misconception of subject” were identified, and
disclosed the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers in delivering the
curriculum in schools. Using this approach, analysis of the interview transcripts
generated in this study involved the following phases.
At the data reduction phase, raw data was selected, simplified, abstracted and
transformed into themes using the coding technique. Punch (2009) maintained that
the data reduction phase seeks to simplify and organise data from the interview
transcripts into more easily manageable components. Data reduction occurs
continually throughout the analysis and is part of the analysis (Punch, 2009). In the
beginning stages, it involves editing, segmenting and summarising the data. In the
middle stages, it involves coding and memoing, and related activities such as
identifying themes and patterns. In the later stages, it involves conceptualising and
explaining abstract concepts. The data reduction process will continue even after
fieldwork, until a final report is completed. Mile and Huberman (1994) commented
that data reduction is a form of analysis that sharpens, sorts, focuses, discards, and
organises data in such a way that ‘final’ conclusions can be drawn and verified. The
objective is to reduce the data without significant loss of information and not to strip
the data from their context.
132
The data reduction process was carried out in two stages – first level coding and
second level coding. Coding is the process of assigning tags or labels against pieces
of the data, which may be individual words, or small or large chunks of the data
(Punch, 2009). Coding is the starting activity in the analytic process and will
continue throughout the analysis. According to Punch (2009), first level coding
involves looking at the general context, whereby data will be broken down into small
discrete parts and examine for regularities, to discover what can be defined, and to
identify concepts. The focus is on identifying and labelling what is in the data using
descriptive codes (Punch, 2009). At the beginning of the analytic process, all data
was re-read several times to develop a list of descriptive codes. Subsequently, each
sentence or group of sentences of each interview transcripts was examined and
labelled with the descriptive codes from the list. While the initial analysis dealt
mainly with the first level coding, it was not long before memoing began as well.
According to Glaser (1978), a memo is the theorising write-up of ideas about codes
and their relations as they strike the analyst while coding, it can consist of a sentence,
a paragraph or a few pages. Memos tie together different pieces of data into a
recognisable cluster, often to show that those data are instances of a general concept
(Miles & Huberman, 1994). All ideas that occurred during the coding process were
recorded as memos; they were indexed for storage and subsequent use at a later
stage. To enable coding and memoing the interview transcripts, a margin was created
on the right hand side of each data sheet. Codes were written and memos were
tagged in this margin using two different colour pens to provide distinction. The
written notes for the memos were recorded at the bottom of the data sheet.
133
Moving on to the next stage, the data was further simplified through the second level
coding. According to Punch (2009), the second level coding uses pattern or
inferential codes that pull together material into smaller and more meaningful units.
Strauss and Corbin (1998) explained that this will involve examining the first level
descriptive codes and clustering similarly coded units together into categories.
During the second level coding, patterns in the first level coding were identified. All
the descriptive codes were brought together and connected into more meaning units
to develop categories. Together with memoing, these categories were used to
discover and understand the emerging themes in the next phase.
At the data display phase, the coded data was grouped into meaningful categories or
themes, and then organised and assembled into suitable forms of representation.
According to Punch (2009), this enable the researcher to better understand the
findings through visual representation of the data collected. Miles and Huberman
(1994) indicated that data display is an organised, compressed assembly of
information that permits conclusion drawing and action. The different ways to
display data include matrices, graphs, charts, networks and diagrams (Punch, 2009).
All displays are designed to assemble organised information into an immediately
accessible, compact form that reveal what stage the analysis has reached and they are
the basis for further analysis. According to Punch (2009), the researcher will be able
to see and understand what is happening, and either draw justified conclusions or to
move on to the next step of analysis which the display suggests may be useful. The
data display phase of the analytic process involved mapping of the categories into a
simplified, compact form using a chart. This chart provided a visual representation of
how the categories relate to each other, and enable the identification of key themes
134
that emerged from each interview transcript. The key themes that emerged from the
analysis of each interview transcript were then be mapped onto a further chart, to
provide for comparison across cases.
Finally, at the drawing and verifying conclusions phase, findings were deduced and
verified from the data. This phase involved the identification of emerging themes to
draw conclusions for the research. Punch (2009) argued that conclusions will be in
the form of propositions and they need to be verified once they are drawn. The final
phase of the analytic process seek to discover themes emerging from the analysis of
each interview transcript, as well as to note any similarities and differences that
emerge from the comparison across cases. Understandings were verified as the
analytic process proceeds. Punch (2009) indicated that verification may be brief, or
thorough and elaborate. The objective is that meanings emerging from the data have
to be tested for their plausibility or validity. For the purpose of strengthening the
findings of the study, a constant comparative approach to the phases of data
reduction, data display and conclusion drawing was employed. Feedback from
participants with regard to the emerging themes, tentative propositions and
conclusions was also sought at the end of the entire data collection and analysis
process.
Trustworthiness of the Study
As part of this study lies within the interpretivist paradigm, criteria of the
interpretivist were used to evaluate its trustworthiness. According to Lincoln and
Guba (1985), the principles of such criteria are transferability, dependability,
135
credibility and confirmability. These are concerned with the honesty of the data
collected from, and about, the participants and the extent to which one have
confidence in the outcome of the study.
Transferability is the extent to which the findings of the study are confirmed by, or
applicable to, a different group of people, or in a different setting from where the
data is collected (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Transferability can be achieved by using
thick description through describing a phenomenon in sufficient detail. In order to
provide thick description when reporting the analysis of this study, the number of
Home Economics teachers was kept small to ensure generation of rich data regarding
their perspectives. In particular, there was extensive use of quotations to illustrate
various issues identified.
Dependability is the measure of rigour that is related to the consistency of findings
and it can be achieved through compiling a clear audit trail and the researcher’s
careful maintenance of the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In this study, all sources
used in data collection, methods of data collection and data analysis were
documented. For example, all conversations with participants and communications
through emails were documented and filed and available for perusal by the
participants together with the detailed file notes of interviews.
Credibility of findings can be achieved when the researcher spends a generous
amount of time observing various aspects of a setting, speaking with a range of
people, developing relationships and creating a rapport with members of the culture
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The researcher has made use of different strategies to build
136
trust with the participants. An effective strategy, for example, was engaging the
‘member checking’ process wherein participants’ interview transcripts, and in
particular the researcher’s interpretation of data, were thoroughly discussed and
checked with study participants.
Confirmability can be achieved by providing a clear description of the research path,
with records on what was done in an investigation. According to Lincoln and Guba
(1985), this includes research design and data collection decisions, and the steps
taken to manage, analyse and report the data. Confirmability of the study was
enhanced by the establishment of an audit trail and maintaining it indefinitely. The
principles and decisions taken about the theoretical, methodological and analytical
throughout the study were discussed explicitly in the audit trail.
Ethical Issues
This study adhered to all ethics principles and guidelines specified by the University
of Western Australia. The human research ethics application document package was
duly completed and submitted for approval before the commencement of the study.
Throughout the study conscious efforts to preserve the privacy, anonymity and
confidentiality of the participants were made. All participants were informed that
there would be anonymity in the final document or subsequent publications.
Pseudonyms were used to protect the identity of the participants and their schools.
All interview transcripts and data analysis were shared with the participants to ensure
137
that misinterpretations have not occurred. Moreover, all information provided by the
participants was used solely for the research and securely stored under lock and key.
Conclusion
This chapter has provided an account and justification of the theoretical framework
and research methods used for the study. The discussion was presented in seven
sections: research questions that guided the study; research design and the underlying
theoretical concepts; sample and sampling strategy used; methods of data collection;
methods of data analysis; trustworthiness of the study; and ethical issues.
It was explained that the research design of the study consisted of two stages. The
first stage engaged the historical research approach to investigate the historical
background and developments of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore.
Documentary data from public and official documents were collected and analysed
using content analysis. In addition, oral histories were also gathered from relevant
stakeholders to supplement the documentary data that were available. Following this
discussion, the second stage of the design was identified. It was explained that the
second stage of the research design adopted the interpretivist research approach to
investigate the issues and concerns faced by the Home Economics teachers in
implementing the 2014 Home Economics curriculum in schools. Sample (teachers
from the three different types of secondary schools), method of data collection (one-
to-one and focus group interviews) and data analysis (content analysis and Miles and
Huberman Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis) were described and justified
for the study. Examples of the employment of method were provided.
138
The next two chapters will present the outcome of the research. Findings pertinent to
the history and development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore will
be discussed in Chapter Five, and findings related to the key issues and concerns of
Home Economics teachers in implementing the curriculum will be discussed in
Chapter Six.
139
CHAPTER FIVE
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HOME ECONOMICS
CURRICULUM
This chapter reports on the findings pertaining to the first and second research
questions addressed by this study:
1. What was the history of the secondary school Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore from the country’s independence in 1965 to 2008?
2. What developments have taken place with regard to the secondary school
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore from 2008 to 2014?
In line with the methodology described in Chapter Four, data from a range of public
and official documents, including educational policies, Home Economics syllabi,
media reports and professional institutions’ statements, supplemented by oral
histories from retired Home Economics teachers and the MOE curriculum specialists,
were analysed to provide these findings.
As explained in Chapter One, the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
involves the integration of MOE’s fundamental curriculum framework, the subject
syllabus and implementation of the syllabus. Up to this time, MOE has issued a
series of highly comprehensive Home Economics syllabi that dictate the Home
Economics education in Singapore. These syllabi encompass all aspects of the Home
Economics programme, which include: objectives and rationale of the subject;
structure of the study components and content; guidelines on allocation of curriculum
time; pedagogy and teaching strategies to deliver the curriculum; assessment of
learning that consist of objectives, format, weighting and marking rubrics; and
140
examples of lessons and projects to follow. As the syllabus is effectively ‘the Home
Economics curriculum’ in Singapore, it was judged necessary to analyse the changes
in the Home Economics syllabus to understand the history and development of the
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore.
The discussion in this chapter is organised into six phases, in line with the six key
revisions of the Home Economics syllabus from 1965 to 2014. An overview of the
timeline, which depicts the major events concerning the development of the Home
Economics curriculum at different phases, is presented in Table 2.
____________________________________________________________________
Phase Year Major Events _______________________________________________________________________ First 1965 Domestic Science was offered to all girls in primary and lower
(1965- secondary level.
1980) 1969 Domestic Science was restricted to 50% of lower secondary girls.
1970 Domestic Science was renamed as Home Economics.
1977 Lower secondary girls were given uncurbed choice to study either
Home Economics or Technical Studies.
1979 Implementation of the New Education System (NES) by the MOE.
1980 A new Home Economics syllabus was issued following the
implementation of the NES.
Second 1984 The MOE announced its intention to make Home Economics compulsory
(1981- for all lower secondary girls.
1985) 1985 A revised Home Economics syllabus that catered to the new policy
was implemented.
141
Third 1991 The MOE announced that Home Economics would be a compulsory
(1986- subject for both lower secondary girls and boys from 1994 onwards.
1994) 1994 A revised Home Economics syllabus for both girls and boys was
implemented.
Fourth 1997 Three new educational initiatives on ‘Thinking Schools, Learning
(1995- Nation’, ‘National Education’ programme and ‘Information
1999) Technology Masterplan’ were launched by the MOE.
1999 A transitional Home Economics syllabus with reduced content was
implemented due to these new initiatives.
Fifth 2002 A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented to streamline and
(2000- update the content. Curriculum review was organised to a six-year cycle.
2008) 2008 A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented based on the six-
year review cycle.
Sixth 2014 Home Economics was renamed as Food and Consumer Education and a
(2009- new FCE syllabus was implemented.
2014)
___________________________________________________________________
Table 2. Timeline for the History and Development of the Home Economics
Curriculum in Singapore, 1965-2014
142
First Phase: 1965-1980
1965: Domestic Science was offered to all girls in primary and lower secondary
level
In 1965, in a newly independent Singapore, the subject of Domestic Science was
initially offered at primary and lower secondary school level to girls (only), a
continuation of an approach first implemented in the mid-1930s. While it was, in
theory, a subject available to all girls, it was delivered only at schools with the
facilities and teachers to support it and was not a compulsory subject in girls’
education (Woo, 1978).
In particular, Domestic Science was not a popular option in primary education
because the programme in primary schools focussed only on the aspect of
needlework and only a very small number of primary schools had the qualified
teachers and appropriate facilities to offer the subject. The result was Domestic
Science was gradually phased out from the primary sector and became a purely
secondary school level subject for girls (Lim, 1979).
Generally taught in English in public schools, Domestic Science was also delivered
in Chinese and Malay languages at the Chinese and Malay medium schools, using
textbooks translated from their English sources (Woo, 1978).
In title and concept, ‘Domestic Science’ was acquired from the British, the focus on
training girls for good home-making and family living (Soo, 1994). According to
informants for this study, the idea that girls should be ‘fitted’ for home duties may
also have reflected the values of Singapore society at that time. A retired Home
143
Economics specialist who worked at the MOE headquarters during the 1960s
explained:
People in the 1960s were generally conservative in their thinking,
such as the stereotype on gender roles. One of the social norms was
females were expected to understand and carry out the domestic tasks
at home. Hence Domestic Science fulfilled this need to train girls in
the knowledge of domestic skills.
The government gave a lot of attention to the nature, purpose and design of
secondary school education, in contemplation of economic growth (see, for example,
The Straits Times, 1965 July 28, p.15). It was claimed that the target for secondary
school education was to produce youths who were rugged, vigorous, intelligent and
capable, endowed with a strong sense of patriotism and possessing a high standard of
education (The Straits Times, 1968 January 2, p.4).
However, another purpose outlined for secondary education was to train for gender-
prescribed roles and this required particular attention to curricula differentiation
between girls and boys. Such purposes and understandings were evident, for
example, in a 1966 account of education policy delivered by the then Minister for
Education, Mr Ong Pang Boon:
Secondary education in any advanced country is getting more and
more specialised. It caters for a wide range of interests, aptitudes and
abilities. In the primary school there is little distinction between boys’
and girls’ school subjects. It is not so in the secondary school. With
144
the large number of girls in secondary schools, girls’ subjects like
Domestic Science, must receive special attention (Ong, 1966).
The era’s faith in the capacity of ‘science’ to solve problems probably helped
contribute to the understanding that Domestic Science should emphasise the
application of science to home problems to enhance family life (THESA, 1988).
In 1965, the five main areas of study in the Domestic Science syllabus included
Health Education, Laundry Work, Cookery, Housewifery and Needlework. Emphasis
was on practical application rather than theoretical teaching, because the objective
was for girls to develop a high standard manipulative skill rather than theoretical
knowledge. The syllabus guidelines highlighted that the main areas of study should
be taught as a complement to each other and cross references should be made. For
example, Health Education ‘care of hair’ should be linked to Housewifery ‘cleaning
of brushes’ and Cookery ‘nutrition of food’ (MOE, 1965). In addition, assignments
for students were to have a ‘project’ basis that involved group work. For example,
one assignment had girls working in groups on planning and cooking a family meal,
followed by laying the table to serve the meal (MOE, 1965).
1969: Domestic Science restricted to 50% of lower secondary girls
In 1969, the government placed restrictions on the percentage of girls who could take
Domestic Science, which was, by then, effectively a lower secondary level subject. The
policy was for the female population to split 50% into Domestic Science and 50% into
Technical Studies. This change was in line with ambitions to generate a human resource
base to support an industrial economy.
145
The MOE set up a Technical Education Department in June 1968 to manage the
implementation of technical education in Singapore as a whole (Yip et al., 1997). At
a debate on the Annual Budget Statement in December 1968, Mr Ong Pang Boon
announced the introduction of a new common curriculum for secondary school
which included a combination of academic and technical subjects to promote
technical education (Ong, 1968a). Essentially, the government accelerated plans in
bolstering technical education to produce more technically trained workers to meet
the demands of new industries.
The focus on technical education was made into a formal policy in 1968.
Subsequently, Technical Studies was offered to all boys and limited to 50% of girls
in the lower secondary from 1969, boosting the training of skilled labour to support
the rapid industrialisation programme.
Interviews with past teachers indicate that girls may not always have been able to
select according to preference. Illustrating the general view, a retired Home
Economics Head of Department, who administered the subjects’ allocation in her
school during that period and organised sharing sessions with other Home
Economics teachers to discuss the issues with regard to this matter, remarked:
The new policy confined 50% of the lower secondary girls to study
Domestic Science and the other 50% to study Technical Studies. The
students did not really have a choice as most schools would allocate
the specific subject (Technical Studies or Domestic Science) for the
girls to ease administrative processes.
146
Despite the introduction of a new common curriculum and emphasis on technical
education for girls, Domestic Science continued to be an essential subject for girls.
The 50% of girls studying Technical Studies were able to learn Domestic Science as
a non-examinable subject, in the form of an enrichment course. This notion was
conveyed by Mr Ong Pang Boon in the same speech in December 1968 when he
announced the restructured curriculum:
Domestic Science will be a compulsory subject for all girls. However,
for girls who are also taking technical subjects, Domestic Science will
not be an examination subject and a modified syllabus will be
followed (Ong, 1968a).
In another speech which he presented at a girls’ school, Mr Ong continued to
maintain that girls would have to study Domestic Science so that “the girls who leave
our schools will have an adequate knowledge of home economics and be able to
contribute to better health and better living conditions of our society as a whole”
(Ong, 1968b).
Although the new policy restricted Domestic Science to only 50% of lower
secondary girls instead of the whole cohort, there were no major changes with regard
to the curriculum. There were only some minor modifications in the areas of study
from the Domestic Science syllabus. For example, pattern drafting was included in
the Needlework component and renamed as Needlework & Dressmaking. There was
also an expanded focus on nutrition and the addition of the topic on convenience
food in the Cookery component. In addition, the Health Education, Laundry Work
147
and Housewifery components were combined into a single unit labelled as
Housecraft (Lim, 1979).
1970: Domestic Science renamed as Home Economics
In 1970, ‘Domestic Science’ was renamed as ‘Home Economics’, following trends in
Western countries (Woo, 1978). The name ‘Home Economics’ originated from the
United States and recognised that women’s domestic roles had expanded from
simply cooking, cleaning and raising children to increasingly handing the purchases
and budget for the household.
The focus on ‘Home Economics’ indicated from the mission of training girls in their
traditional domestic and maternal roles was to be expanded to equipping them with
knowledge and skills in consumerism and the management of household resources.
For example, addressing the Home Economics forum, the then Parliamentary
Secretary of Education, Mr Ahmad Matter advised: “we must guide our young not
only to keep abreast of new thinking and products in an increasing technological
society, but also arm them with sound knowledge and judgement in consumer
choice” (Matter, 1975).
Participants interviewed for the oral histories in this study shared a general consensus
that the new name better reflected the status and role of the subject. A comment from
a retired Home Economics teacher captures the perspective:
Many teachers found the word ‘Domestic’ as old fashioned and
degrading in a modern society. It was also too restricted in meaning
and could not encompass the different areas of study. We supported
148
the name change because ‘Home Economics’ showed the subject to be
in line with the development of the society, and embraced a broader
perspective in the different areas of study.
A Home Economics Standing Committee was appointed by the MOE in 1970 to
review the syllabus as the existing Domestic Science syllabus (issued before
Independence in 1961) had not been revised except for minor modifications (Lim,
1979). It was felt there was an urgent need for the syllabus to be updated and kept up
to social changes, because Singapore was undergoing rapid industrialisation and
urbanisation. The Committee completed the draft for the revised syllabus in 1974 and
in contemplation of a projected revamping of the education system in 1979, the MOE
decided to try out the draft syllabus in four secondary schools in 1976 and 1977
(Lim, 1979).
1977: Girls given uncurbed choice to study Home Economics or Technical Studies
In 1977, the MOE announced that girls were to be given the option to study Home
Economics or Technical Studies with no curb on the percentage of girls who could
study Home Economics (Yip et al., 1997). The policy change responded to the
increasingly demand from girls to study Home Economics (Woo, 1978).
Retired Home Economics teachers participating in this study tended to attribute the
increased demand for Home Economics to a disenchantment with the alternative:
During our Home Economics focus group discussions, teachers
responded that more girls would prefer to study Home Economics.
The common understanding gathered was that most girls were not
149
interested to study technical subjects because they did not like to work
with the heavy machinery in the technical workshops. While some
girls found it difficult to cope with Technical Studies when they took
up the offer to study this subject and would like to switch over to
Home Economics.
Expectations were that about 80% of girls would choose to study Home Economics
under the revised policy, giving principals concern that the Home Economics
facilities in their schools would not be able to handle the increase in the number of
students taking this subject (Kho, 2004).
A retired Home Economics Head of Department, who had participated in Home
Economics teachers’ meetings that examined the issues faced by schools during
implementation of the revised policy, recalled the situation at that time:
Whether or not the girls were granted their option to study Home
Economics really relied on the school resources, for example, the
number of Home Economics teachers available. Some schools were
unable to open up more Home Economics classes due to the shortage
of Home Economics teachers. Hence there was a need to speed up the
recruitment and training of more Home Economics teachers.
Similar observations were made by other interviewees who had implemented the
revised policy in their schools during that period.
150
1979: Implementation of the New Education System (NES)
The year 1979 was a milestone in Singapore’s educational development due to the
implementation of the New Education System (NES). In 1978, a high-ranking
reviewing committee led by the former Deputy Prime Minister, Dr. Goh Keng Swee,
reviewed the education system and overhauled it completely. The education system
underwent a major structural innovation following this review, with the publication
of the Report on the Ministry of Education.
The report recommended a method of streaming pupils based on their academic
ability, primarily in languages and mathematics. Pupils were to be streamed into
different courses of study determined by a series of tests, examinations and teachers’
reports. The report also specified that streaming would “provide an opportunity for
less capable pupils to develop at a pace slower than for the more capable students”
and would “allow a child every opportunity to go as far as he can” (cited in Goh,
1979). The implementation of the report by the MOE in 1979 led to the NES, which
encompassed the provision of ability-based streaming and changes to the school
curriculum to meet the differentiated needs of the students (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999).
As mentioned, the revised Home Economics syllabus formulated in 1974 was tried
out in four secondary schools in 1976 and 1977, in contemplation of this overhaul in
the education system. The teachers in these four secondary schools gave favourable
feedback to the Home Economics Standing Committee after the trial (Lim, 1979).
The results showed that teachers found the revised syllabus to be helpful and they
were able to achieve the stated aims and objectives. The teachers also indicated that
their pupils had demonstrated a wide understanding of the topics that they studied.
151
A retired Home Economics specialist who was a member of the Home Economics
Standing Committee involved in the development and trial of the draft syllabus,
made the following observations on the outcome of this syllabus review:
With feedback obtained from both the teachers and pupils, the
Committee was able to improve on the different areas in the syllabus.
The draft was updated and presented to the relevant department for
approval in 1979. Subsequently the revised syllabus was ready to be
launched in 1980.
1980: A new Home Economics syllabus was issued due to the NES and changing
needs
A new Home Economics syllabus was issued in 1980, following the implementation
of the NES. Home Economics was also being challenged by a rapidly changing
society at that time, brought about by external factors such as urbanisation,
industrialisation and innovative technology. Hence there was a need to revise the
syllabus in the light of these factors and their effect upon the individual and the
family structure (MOE, 1980).
The national newspaper, the New Nation described the revision and implementation
of the new Home Economics syllabus, reporting that “students will be taught to
relate homemaking, cookery and needlework to real-life situations” (New Nation,
1980 January 24, p.3). Under the new syllabus, the newspaper observed, baking a
cake involved not only whipping up the ingredients according to the recipe but
getting students to bake for an occasion like Father’s Day (New Nation, 1980
152
January 24, p.3). The newspaper also disclosed that the topic of Family Life was
made compulsory for Home Economics classes from 1980. A MOE official
interviewed by the newspaper explained that this move was brought about by
changes in living patterns. The official also mentioned that Home Economics
provided many realistic situations for teachers to inculcate desirable values in
students because it was very much a practical subject. Students could learn values
such as consideration for others, and how to live harmoniously in high-rise Housing
Development Board flats (New Nation, 1980 January 24, p.3).
The newspaper also reported on the popularity of a ‘Home Economics Teachers’
Resource Centre’, which was set up in 1975 and located at Crescent Girls’ School
(New Nation, 1980 January 24, p.3). This resource centre was manned by two Home
Economics teachers on day release from their schools. Teachers could borrow
resource materials and reference books on Home Economics, as well as seek advice
from two senior subject teachers on teaching programmes. A senior subject teacher
operating the centre commented in the newspaper interview:
Besides providing resource materials, the centre also conducts
meetings, workshops, demonstrations and talks on the subject.
Teachers can broaden their horizon and keep up-to-date with new
developments in the field. They can also exchange ideas to make
teaching more meaningful and effective (New Nation, 1980 January
24, p.3).
This resource centre has since closed down and the collective knowledge of
interviewees was that no other Home Economics resource centre has been
established since the closure.
153
The 1980 syllabus differed considerably in emphasis and content from that of the
syllabus used in 1965. There was a significant shift away from the earlier emphasis
on manipulative skills and the scope was expanded to include knowledge and skills
for family living. In addition, the focus of the subject was amended to provide a
distinct economics-orientation. The following extract from the ‘1980 Syllabus and
Guidelines for Home Economics in Secondary Schools’ explained the changes:
The syllabus has been revised to balance the manipulative skills with
managerial and social skills to give relevance to living. This approach
will provide learning experiences for our young people to realise their
potential for effective living within their family, school and
community (MOE, 1980).
An interviewee, a retired Home Economics specialist who was involved in
developing the 1980 syllabus, identified improvements in the new syllabus:
The new syllabus was clearer and provided more details compared to
the old syllabus. The new syllabus document contained a structured
outline of the different aspects of the curriculum to help the teacher
better understand and carry out the teaching of the subject.
Similar views were also offered by the other participants during their oral history
interviews, when asked about the features they had observed in the new syllabus.
According to the MOE (1980), the aim of the new syllabus was to establish those
attitudes and values which would give meaning to personal and family living, to
create a home and community environment conducive to healthy growth and
154
development of family members, and to give training in the management of personal
and family resources. The rationale of the new syllabus revealed the adoption of the
popular critical science approach with regard to curriculum design, a shift from the
traditional technical approach used in the earlier syllabus. This was in line with the
direction of the global trend during that period, whereby Home Economics education
responded to increased consumerism with a continued focus on the consumer and
scientific models and methods.
As described in Chapter Three, the critical science approach was frequently
identified as most appropriate for the intent of Home Economics education
(Montgomery, 2008; Baldwin, 1989; Brown & Paolucci, 1979). This approach
involved strategically planned content that helped students to think, reason and
reflect, in order to arrive at plausible solutions for issues and problems concerning
the family in an ever-changing and diverse society (Brown & Paolucci, 1979). In the
late 1970s, Singapore was undergoing rapid development and the society was
exposed to both Eastern and Western cultural influences. Hence the critical science
perspectives in the new syllabus were intended to cultivate values for the good of
‘the family’ and Singapore society.
The 1980 ‘Syllabus and Guidelines for Home Economics in Secondary Schools’
provided a comprehensive layout of the subject topics, aims, learning experiences
and suggested activities. Family Life, Food and Nutrition, Fashion and Fabrics, and
General Housecraft were the four main areas of study in the new syllabus (MOE,
1980). The components of Food and Nutrition, Fashion and Fabrics, and General
Housecraft represented a continuation from the original syllabus. The new
155
component of Family Life was introduced to cover human development and
relationships and was concerned with making the student aware of her social
environment and how to interact with it. According to the course framework (MOE,
1980), each of these components was to be taught as a complement to each other,
with Family Living as the core area. Similar to the earlier syllabus, assignments were
to comprise of project work based on daily living situations to make lessons more
meaningful. The syllabus emphasised group work in order to develop cooperation
and sense of sharing among the students (MOE, 1980). For example, girls were to
work together cooperatively to make herbal beverages for an invalid in the family
(MOE, 1980).
The new syllabus also offered suggestions on types of Home Economics-related
programmes that could be conducted for both girls and boys outside the normal
school curricula. These included Personal Development Courses with content
tailored to suit students’ needs, ‘Package’ Programmes with short sessions on any
aspect of Home Economics, and Home Economics as an Extra Curricula Activity
with membership open to non-Home Economics students (MOE, 1980). Students
could sign up for any of these programmes. A retired Home Economics specialist
who held a supervisory role at the MOE Home Economics Unit during that period
observed:
Although Home Economics was not offered to boys as a subject in the
1980s, they still had the opportunity to learn this subject through the
different Home Economics enrichment programmes that were
implemented by the school. These programmes offered diverse and
156
interesting activities and were generally popular among students that
did not have the chance to study Home Economics.
Meanwhile the practice of teaching Home Economics in Chinese and Malay
languages was discontinued around 1980, due to the closure of the Chinese and
Malay medium schools. Participants in the oral history interviews who had been
involved in this matter revealed that Home Economics teachers in the Chinese and
Malay medium schools had to make adjustments in their teaching duty as a result of
this development. A retired Home Economics teacher who had taught the subject in a
Chinese medium school recounted the situation during an oral history interview:
When the MOE discontinued the teaching of Home Economics in
mother tongue (Chinese and Malay), teachers conversant in English
(like me) were redeployed and carried on teaching the subject in
English. While those not skilful in English were asked to switch to
teach other subject like mother tongue.
Second Phase: 1981-1985
1984: Declaration of compulsory Home Economics for all lower secondary girls
By the early 1980s, the Singapore economy was taking off and the government
shifted its focus to social issues rather than the need to produce skilled labour. There
was a call for girls to be able to cook, sew, look after babies, budget and manage the
home. The government noticed that girls did not receive enough preparation for
marriage and motherhood. With the formation of more nuclear families, girls had
fewer opportunities to pick up housekeeping skills, as compared to living in an
157
extended family in the old days. It would be more beneficial for girls to study Home
Economics than Technical Studies to equip them with the essential knowledge and
skills. Hence in 1984, MOE announced the decision to make Home Economics
compulsory for all lower secondary girls from 1985 (The Straits Times, 1984
September 9, p.1).
With this policy review, lower secondary girls no longer had the choice to study
either Home Economics or Technical Studies. The then Minister of State for
Education, Dr Tay Eng Soon, justified the policy change by pointing out:
Girls would gain more from Home Economics than from Technical
Studies. Very few Singaporeans had housemaids and the
responsibilities of running a home and bringing up children would fall
heavily on women (The Straits Times, 1984 September 9, p.1).
In addition, he mentioned that boys were not included in the programme as the MOE
must first get enough teachers for the girls (The Straits Times, 1984 September 9,
p.1).
It was envisaged that the compulsory Home Economics education would help to
prepare all girls for their future roles as homemaker and mother. It reflected that the
society was generally a patriarchal one, and females still played just a supporting role
(Kho, 2004). Participants in the oral history interviews generally felt that although
more women were engaged in the work force during that time, society at large still
perceived women to be the main homemaker in the family. A retired Home
Economics teacher who had encountered the policy change shared this common
sentiment:
158
In the 1980s, more women were educated and the number of working
women had been increasing. But women were still expected to
manage the household chores and take care of the children after work.
Compulsory Home Economics education would provide all the girls
the knowledge and skills to fulfil these responsibilities.
Accordingly, the revised policy was intended to prepare girls to manage the issues
and challenges in shared family life. However there was an unexpected outcry from
the public when the MOE made the announcement. The Straits Times (1984
November 24, p.21) reported on a petition signed by 428 people that urged the MOE
to offer Home Economics to all students. The petition expressed these concerns:
Boys could not learn that they have an important role to play in the
family if they do not study Home Economics. Furthermore, having
separate subjects for boys and girls would not help to maximise use of
Singapore’s limited pool of talent (The Straits Times, 1984 November
24, p.21).
The petition proposed that Home Economics should not be made compulsory for
girls only, but should be an elective for everybody, regardless of gender (The Straits
Times, 1984 November 24, p.21). The then Parliamentary Secretary of Education,
Mr Ho Kah Leong, explained that boys were not offered study in Home Economics
because of the shortage of teachers, and denied that making Home Economics
compulsory for girls constituted gender discrimination (The Straits Times, 1984
November 27, p.1). He clarified that the MOE would like boys to do Home
159
Economics hence more teachers would be encouraged to take up training in this
subject to ease the shortage.
1985: A revised Home Economics syllabus catering to the new policy was
implemented
The shift in policy on compulsory Home Economics for all lower secondary girls led
to the implementation of a revised Home Economics syllabus in 1985. The revised
syllabus took into account “the changing government policies regarding quality of
population, family life and child development” (Soo, 1994). Likewise, at a Home
Economics Teachers’ Association Seminar in 1986, Mrs Evelyn Lim, the then
Specialist Inspector of Home Economics from the MOE, spoke about the revised
1985 Home Economics syllabus:
Home Economics is a people-oriented field developed to meet the
needs of the family. Rapid economic growth in Singapore has affected
life styles and family patterns. Hence the syllabus has been revised to
meet the life skills of future young adults to cope with the decisions
and challenges that await them (Home Economics Teachers’
Association, 1986).
The 1985 revised Home Economics syllabus responded to the changing trends in
family life by redefining the objectives of the earlier 1980 syllabus. This action was
stated in the ‘1985 Home Economics Syllabus Secondary 1 and 2 Express/Normal
Course’:
The areas that make up Home Economics education have been re-
examined and emphasis has been shifted to prepare pupils for living in
160
today’s world. They will be made aware to handle the complexities
they are confronted with in shared family life, childcare, nutrition,
personal grooming, useful leisure pursuits and consumerism (MOE,
1985).
The Straits Times (1986 April 29, p.2) identified three key focus areas in the 1985
Home Economics syllabus:
Home Economics as taught in school has undergone a shift in
emphasis over the past years. About 20 years ago, the subject was half
cookery and half dressmaking. The revised syllabus for Secondary 1
and 2 now stresses family life and home management (including a
section on child development), food and nutrition, and fabric and
clothing.
The core of the 1985 syllabus was on the values and attitudes related to roles and
responsibilities in the family and the management of family resources. The
curriculum design continued to be based on the critical science approach, similar to
the previous 1980 syllabus. According to the MOE (1985), the revised syllabus
would equip pupils with a sound knowledge of Home Economics to help them solve
their own problems wisely, live graciously with other people, and develop a sensible
outlook on social and national problems. The main intention was to help pupils
understand the importance of nurturing and strengthening family life. This objective
could be achieved by creating an awareness of the responsibilities and contributions
involved in managing a home and family. Hence the delivery of the course would be
activity oriented, with the emphasis on ‘practical’ living. The basic skills and
161
concepts inherent in the subject would form the course foundation, while practical
projects and written exercises were used to assess pupils’ achievements (MOE,
1985).
The 1985 syllabus was rather similar in scope and content to the 1980 syllabus and
was generally a consolidation and re-organisation of the main areas of study. There
were only three main areas of study in the 1985 syllabus. General Housecraft was
combined with Family Life and renamed as Family Life & Home Management.
However this component took on a greater dimension with the inclusion of a new
content on Child Development. This new content dealt with the development of
young children from birth to five years and enabled students to understand the child’s
physical, emotional, intellectual and social needs during the different stages of
development (MOE, 1985). The other two areas of study were Food and Nutrition,
and Fabrics and Clothing.
Food and Nutrition remained a staple area in the revised syllabus and continued to
encompass the study of nutrition and food preparation to promote healthy eating
habits, and comparative buying in relation to consumerism. Fabrics and Clothing was
called Fashion and Fabrics in the 1980 syllabus. However this area was reduced in
emphasis and the content modified to reflect the changing lifestyle in modern
Singapore society. As ready-made clothes were so easily available at very reasonable
cost, there was no longer the priority on the skills of dressmaking and the focus was
switched to wise consumerism in buying, caring and wearing clothes instead.
162
A retired Home Economics specialist, who was involved in developing the 1985
syllabus, identified the rationale in the curriculum change:
With the progress in our society, it was cheaper and more convenient
to buy ready-made clothing from the many fashion stores that were
located everywhere. Furthermore less people got the time and interest
to sew their own clothes. Hence it was more valuable to teach the
students how to select and care for clothing instead.
Similar justifications with regard to revision in the Fashion and Fabrics component
were also made by other retired teachers during the interviews.
Similar to the 1980 syllabus guidelines, the 1985 syllabus also contained information
on the topics, content, general objectives, specific objectives and suggested activities.
It set clear directions for teachers to follow and at the same time allowed scope for
creative programme development through the provision of flexibility in planning the
activities. For example, teachers could foster students’ creativity by conducting an
activity on adding trimmings and accessories to fashion clothing in the Fabrics and
Clothing component (MOE, 1985).
Mrs Evelyn Lim, the former Specialist Inspector of Home Economics from the
MOE, mentioned about enhancing the students’ learning experiences with regard to
the revised syllabus:
We should stimulate students to think for themselves and helped them
to become independent learners, especially during the practical
lessons. Besides developing the psychomotor skills, we can develop
their cognitive and affective domains by making students think about
163
what they have learnt. For example, instead of just demonstrating how
to make Queen Cakes, the teacher can guide students to think by
asking probing questions on the ‘hows’ and ‘whys’ regarding cake
making, such as ‘how to judge a good cake?’ and ‘why is it suitable to
use a black baking pan?’ (Home Economics Teachers’ Association,
1986).
The 1985 syllabus also included the remark that “differentiated schemes of work
must be planned for the Normal and Express Courses” (MOE, 1985). This was to
highlight the differentiated instructions needed for students in the different courses
with regard to their academic abilities. Teachers were advised to keep topics covered
similar between the different courses, but they could add more depth in the theory
and include one or two variations on the basic recipe in the practical session for the
Express course students. When asked about the significance of engaging
differentiated instructions, all interviewees agreed that this was essential and
necessary as it would provide a conducive environment for effective classroom
learning.
Third Phase: 1986-1994
1991: Declaration of compulsory Home Economics for all lower secondary girls
and boys from 1994
During the period 1986-1990, all lower secondary girls continued to study Home
Economics but increasingly a need was seen to offer the subject to the lower
secondary boys as well. The then Minister of State for Education, Dr Tay Eng Soon,
164
gave the following assurance during his speech at the Home Economics Teachers’
Association Seminar in 1986:
We have given priority to girls for the study of this course (Home
Economics). But the opportunity will be given also to boys when
teaching resources become available. We view home-making as a
cooperative endeavour involving both husband and wife. The day
when a man can leave it all to his wife to do all the child-rearing and
upbringing is rapidly receding (Home Economics Teachers’
Association, 1986).
In 1991, the MOE announced that Home Economics would be a compulsory subject
for both lower secondary girls and boys from 1994 onwards (The Straits Times, 1991
July 11, p.23). This revision in policy responded to a changing society, as more
females were entering the workforce, and there was a growing emphasis on feminism
and gender equality. The revised policy was aimed at ensuring that both girls and
boys were equipped for their future roles at work and in the family. For example, the
former Minister of State for Education, Dr Seet Ai Mee, explained during a speech
that Singapore’s changing socio-economic norms where both parents worked full
time meant that men and women would have to play complementary roles in
bringing up the children and managing the home, hence “a Home Economics
programme for boys and girls will pave the way towards shared responsibility in the
home” (Seet, 1991).
The Singapore education system also went through a major revamp in the early
1990s to be in tune with current needs. The term ‘fine-tuning’ has served as a useful
165
code word to describe major changes in the education system, as it implied both
continuity and change (Ho & Gopinathan, 1999). Such a fine-tuning exercise in 1991
generated a number of major initiatives in decisions concerning education, including
the provision of the Normal (Technical) course. The Normal (Technical) course was
introduced at the secondary level to provide a more technically-oriented basic
secondary education for academically less-inclined students (Ho & Gopinathan,
1999).
For the revised policy, all lower secondary students would need to take Crafts and
Technology, which comprised of Art and Craft, Home Economics and Design and
Technology (Kho, 2004). However, due to the constraint of facilities and trained
teachers, the policy was being implemented in phases. Starting with boys and girls
entering the Secondary One Normal (Technical) course in 1994, it was gradually
extended to the Special, Express and Normal (Academic) courses as facilities and
teaching staff became available (The Straits Times 1993 August 31, p.18).
On interview, retired Home Economics teachers who had experienced the
implementation of this revised policy explained further on the situation during that
transition period:
As both boys and girls were required to study Home Economics, there
would be a surge in the number of students. But the lack of manpower
and facilities meant that the policy ought to be implemented slowly.
To meet the demand for more Home Economics teachers, current
teachers who were interested to teach the subject were invited to enrol
in a full time re-training programme. They would be equipped with
166
the content and skills that qualified them to teach Home Economics
after the programme. There was also the need to upgrade the facilities,
to ensure the availability of two cookery rooms to conduct practical
lessons. New schools under construction would need to equip with
two cookery rooms, while existing schools were instructed to locate
an extra room for setting up the second cookery room.
The revised policy was fully implemented across all the courses in the lower
secondary by 1998 (The Straits Times 1996 March 30, p.25). This arguably marked a
step forward, as Home Economics was no longer gender-specific.
1994: A revised Home Economics syllabus catering to both girls and boys was
implemented
The ruling policy on compulsory Home Economics for all lower secondary students
led to the implementation of a revised Home Economics syllabus in 1994. The
mission of the 1994 syllabus was “to equip pupils with knowledge and skills in
Home Economics in order to prepare them for adult life” (CPD, 1994). This revised
syllabus was clearly designed for both boys and girls, as the important role of men
helping out in the home to support working women was explicitly acknowledged in
the syllabus for the first time.
The philosophy of the ‘1994 Home Economics Syllabus Secondary 1 and 2’
specified that:
Today, more and more women join the work force to contribute to the
family income and improve standards of living. The traditional role of
167
women as home-maker has thus been extended to that of co-earner.
Men need to realise the importance of this extended role and to
provide the support to their women folk through partnership in the
house (CPD, 1994).
Correspondingly, when queried by this researcher, all participants in the oral
histories agreed that the revised syllabus had demonstrated the idea of ‘shared
responsibility in the home’, which was described in the previous section when the
MOE announced the revised policy of compulsory Home Economics for all lower
secondary girls and boys.
The 1994 syllabus displayed great differences in aim and rational when compared to
the 1985 syllabus. The 1985 syllabus focussed on the inculcation of values and
attitudes in the pupils. However the 1994 syllabus emphasised knowledge and skills
that would enable pupils to become creative and resourceful problem-solvers and
decision-makers. The 1994 syllabus had followed the global direction in Home
Economics education, which was to engage practical reasoning and critical thinking
to explore the incompatibility of the scientific paradigm (Smith and de Zwart, 2011),
as illustrated in Chapter Two on the international history and trends in Home
Economics education.
According to the CPD (1994), the aim of the revised syllabus was to prepare boys
and girls for their future dual roles, through improved management of personal
resources of time, energy and money. It also intended to develop in boys and girls
collaborative skills within the family. The objective was to develop a positive
attitude towards Home Economics through experiential learning, by engaging
168
activities that have practical application to family life (CPD, 1994). The emphasis
was on practical work and using current data to make the subject relevant to daily
life. In line with the common trend, design of the 1994 syllabus was still based on the
critical science model. A more scientific and problem-solving approach which
stressed cognitive and skills development was recommended for the teaching of this
syllabus.
In addition, the content and main areas of study in the 1994 syllabus were also rather
different from the previous syllabi. Topics on Family Life and Home Management
that formed the core in the 1980 and 1985 syllabi were removed. However the
syllabus guidelines maintained that “although the area on ‘The Family’ does not
appear in the syllabus, family continues to be the focus for the learning of this Home
Economics syllabus” (CPD, 1994). The component on Family Life and Home
Management was taken out because this area was covered quite extensively in two
other subjects - Pastoral Care and Career Guidance, and Civics and Moral Education
(Soo, 1994). As the Home Economics programme now involved both girls and boys,
topics on personal grooming and hygiene related to females were also removed from
the syllabus.
There were five main areas of study in the 1994 syllabus and the topics were much
more science-based. Nutrition for the Family covered topics on nutrition in food,
food and culture and nutrition needs for different age groups; Food Management
contained topics on food science, food preparation and food safety; Creative Textiles
included topics on fabrics and decorative techniques; Consumer Education focussed
on comparative buying and shopping wisely for food and clothes; and Children at
169
Play dealt with child development and learning through activities (CPD, 1994). The
areas of study complement one another and should be taught in an integrative
manner.
The 1994 syllabus document presented comprehensive information on the different
aspects of the Home Economics programme, including rationale, topics, content,
suggested activities, planning of curriculum time and mode of assessment. However,
compared to the previous syllabuses, there was a notable difference in greater
emphasis on assessment and special focus on course work. More details on the
assessment objectives, skills assessed, assessment types and assessment format were
provided. Formative assessment comprised of pupil’s daily work such as worksheets
and practical works, while summative assessment was based on both a written paper
and coursework (CPD, 1994).
The coursework component was highlighted because it made up 60% to 70% of the
assessment weighting. The coursework assignment, “in the form of project work”,
should “cover the areas of study in the syllabus” and accompanied by the submission
of “a folio detailing the planning and completion of the product” (CPD, 1994). In
addition, the syllabus also gave suggested briefs for the coursework assignment. For
example, the students could “design and make some new cushions to replace the old
and worn out ones as New Year is round the corner”, with regard to the study area of
Creative Textiles (CPD, 1994).
Participants in the study maintained that the new syllabus was more precise and
thorough. For example, a retired Home Economics Head of Department, who
170
conducted workshops with other schools on implementation of the syllabus during
that time, commented on the impact of the changes in the syllabus:
The better and clearer information on assessment and coursework in
the revised syllabus was beneficial. It offered proper standard and
guidelines for all Home Economics teachers to follow. These details
helped teachers to better understand how to assess their students
accurately and to carry out the coursework component with more
confidence.
Fourth Phase: 1995-1999
1997: Three new educational initiatives were launched by the MOE
Three new educational initiatives on ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’,
‘Information Technology (IT) Masterplan’ and ‘National Education’ programme
were launched by the MOE in 1997. The introduction of these initiatives led to a
major content reduction exercise for all curricula, in recognition of the extra time
needed to incorporate these initiatives into the curriculum.
The educational initiatives of ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’ and ‘IT
Masterplan’ were launched in a bid to promote greater creativity and innovation in
students, while the ‘National Education’ programme was introduced to foster and
build a shared sense of nationhood. Government statements made it clear that these
initiatives were crucial to national efforts to remain economically competitive and for
the transition to knowledge economy (Tan & Gopinathan, 2000).
171
‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’ focussed on developing all students into active
learners with critical thinking skills, and on developing a creative and critical
thinking culture within schools. To be successful in a knowledge-driven economy,
Singapore students need to be able to collate, synthesise, analyse and apply
knowledge to solve problems (Gopinathan, 2001). The former Prime Minister, Mr
Goh Chok Tong, announced this new initiative in June 1997 at the opening of the 7th
International Conference on Thinking. He described this initiative as a vision for a
total learning environment, which involved all stakeholders in education and
strategy, in ensuring that the young generation could think for themselves and find
their own solutions to whatever problems they may face, for the purpose of
maintaining economic competitiveness of the nation (Goh, 1997).
According to MOE (2012b), this initiative aimed to develop a nation of thinking and
committed citizens, capable of making good decisions to keep Singapore vibrant and
successful, and meeting the challenges of the future. Specifically, “Thinking Schools
will be learning organisations in every sense, constantly challenging assumptions,
and seeking better ways of doing things through participation, creativity and
innovation”, while “Learning Nation envisions a national culture and social
environment that promotes lifelong learning in our people” (MOE, 2012b). The key
strategies for this initiative involved the explicit teaching of critical and creative
thinking skills, the reduction of subject content, and the revision of assessment
modes.
The ‘IT Masterplan’ was an earnest attempt by the MOE to incorporate ICT in
teaching and learning in every Singapore school. The underlying rationale was that
172
ICT could be integrated into the “thinking curriculum” to motivate students to be
creative and independent (Goh & Gopinathan, 2008). Mr Teo Chee Hean, the then
Minister of Education, made the following comments at the launch of this initiative
in April 1997:
The next century will witness the increasing use of information and
knowledge as engines of productivity and economic growth. We have
to prepare ourselves and our children to be discerning and astute users
of information as well as creator of knowledge (Teo, 1997).
Up to this time, three Masterplans had been carried out since the launch. The first
Masterplan (1997-2002) laid a strong foundation for schools to harness ICT,
particularly in the provision of basic ICT infrastructure and in equipping teachers
with a basic level of ICT integration competency (MOE, 2008). The second
Masterplan (2003-2008) strived for an effective and pervasive use of ICT, through a
systematic and holistic approach by integrating all key components in the education
system – curriculum, assessment, pedagogy, professional training and culture (Goh
& Gopinathan, 2008). The third Masterplan (2009-2014) sought to strengthen
integration of ICT into curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, to provide
differentiated professional development, to improve the sharing of best practices and
successful innovations, and to enhance ICT provisions in schools (MOE, 2008).
The ‘National Education’ programme was an integral part of the government’s
strategies in education to prepare for the future, crucial to the continued success and
well-being of Singapore in the 21st Century (MOE, 1997). At the launch of the
173
‘National Education’ programme in May 1997, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Mr
Lee Hsieh Loong, spoke about the purpose of this initiative:
National Education aims to develop national cohesion, cultivate the
instinct for survival as a nation and instil in the students confidence in
the nation’s future. It also emphasises on cultivating a sense of
belonging and emotional rootedness to Singapore (Lee, 1997).
Ultimately, this programme was to ensure that students “develop an awareness of
facts, circumstances and opportunities facing Singapore, so that they will be able to
make decisions for their future with conviction and realism”, and that they also
“develop a sense of emotional belonging and commitment to the community and
nation so that they will stay and fight when the odds are against us” (MOE, 1997).
According to the MOE (1997), National Education should be a part of a holistic
education and would not be carried through any single subject or topic of study, but
infused across the formal and informal curricula in schools. The emphasis would be
on active participation and experiential learning, so that students would regard
National Education as an integral and intrinsic part of school life (MOE, 1997).
1999: A transitional Home Economics syllabus with reduced content was
implemented due to the new educational initiatives
In 1999, the new educational initiatives led to the implementation of a transitional
Home Economics syllabus with reduced content. This was an interim measure
adopted by the MOE before the fully revised syllabus was ready for use (CPDD,
1998).
174
According to the CPDD (1998), teachers needed time to deliver the National
Education ideas, infuse thinking skills and incorporate the use of ICT in their lessons.
However the updated syllabi for most subjects would only be available from 2001,
because of the intensive review procedure. Thus the MOE decided to embark on an
exercise to reduce content in the curriculum to provide teachers with the time that
they needed to implement the initiatives, before the fully revised syllabi were due
(CPDD, 1998).
When asked about the value of this interim measure, all participants in the oral
histories acknowledged that the transitional syllabus had given teachers the
opportunity to explore and be acquainted with the new initiatives, and prepared them
sufficiently for the impending new syllabus.
In the process of reducing curriculum content, curriculum specialists from the MOE
took into account the learning outcomes of each subject syllabus, and worked with
relevant personnel from different educational institutions to finalise the proposed
cuts in the syllabi. Eventually, core content which comprised the essential
knowledge, skills and values that preserve the integrity of the subject, and which
served a firm foundation for further learning at higher levels, were retained (CPDD,
1998). However, content which dealt with less critical knowledge or skills, and
which could be taught in less depth or breadth without affecting the learning
outcomes, were removed (CPDD, 1998).
Content removed from the subject syllabi included concepts or skills which were not
fundamental to the essence of the subject; topics which overlapped with what was
175
taught in other subjects; issues which were no longer relevant in the Singapore
context or in real world practice; and learning which was too difficult or abstract for
the intended level (CPDD, 1998). The amount of curriculum time for each subject
remained unchanged as time freed by the content reduction was to be used for
implementing the educational initiatives.
The content reduction exercise for the Home Economics syllabus was based on
closed monitoring of the execution of the previous syllabus, feedback obtained from
22 teachers across the schools, and discussions with relevant personnel from other
institutions. The guiding principles used in the exercise included the following:
To ensure topics removed were not fundamental to the subject;
To remove topics that focussed mainly on factual recall and not relevant to
the pupils at their current stage of life;
To ensure no unnecessary content overlap with other subjects in the school
curriculum (CPDD, 1998).
Feedback from the consultations revealed that the content on Children at Play should
be removed. It was reported that pupils were unable to relate and cope with the vast
information associated with the four main areas of child development – physical,
intellectual, emotional and social (CPDD, 1998). Pupils found the concepts in this
topic abstract and difficult to comprehend. In addition, they regarded this area of
study as neither relevant nor essential to their present stage of life. A retired Home
Economics specialist, who was involved in the content reduction exercise, affirmed
the feedback received with this explanation in an oral history interview:
176
Pupils at this age group (lower secondary) were too young to
understand those theories on child development. They were also lack
of interest as the topic did not relate to them at this stage of their life.
Hence the decision was made to remove this topic from the syllabus.
As a result, the ‘1999 Home Economics Syllabus Lower Secondary 1 and 2’ saw the
complete removal of the component on Children at Play. The remaining four main
areas of study now included Nutrition for the Family, Food Management, Creative
Textiles and Consumer Education. Consequently, this content reduction freed up
15% of the subject curriculum time. The 1999 syllabus advised teachers to distribute
this extra curriculum time to the other four areas of study (CPDD, 1998). The Home
Economics programme was thus realigned to incorporate the educational initiatives
of infusing thinking skills, ICT knowledge and patriotism in the curriculum.
Functioning as an interim document, the 1999 syllabus contained only essential
information on the rationale for content reduction and the content to be removed.
Apart from this, the syllabus also specified the topics to be covered for the different
courses. For example, the topic on food and culture catered only to the Express
course, while the topic on nutritional needs for the elderly was to be taught to both
the Express and Normal (Academic) courses (CPDD, 1998). This would help the
teachers to facilitate their lesson planning and delivery for the different courses.
177
Fifth Phase: 2000-2008
2002: A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented to streamline and
update content
During 2000-2001, schools continued to utilise the 1999 syllabus during this
transition period. In 2002, a revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented to
streamline and update the subject content. This was a fully revised syllabus, in
succession to the 1999 syllabus which was adopted as an interim measure. According
to the CPDD (2001), the revised 2002 syllabus incorporated new knowledge in
Home Economics education and reflected current trends in education. The mission of
this revised syllabus was “to develop pupils’ knowledge, skills and attitudes in Home
Economics for the wellbeing of self, family and the community” (CPDD, 2001).
The aim and rationale of the ‘2002 Home Economics Syllabus Lower Secondary’
revealed a continuation from the 1994 syllabus. The CPDD (2001) maintained that a
rapidly changing world required the pupils to compete and contribute in a climate of
change, and to make critical decisions that affect their personal, family and social
life. Hence the 2002 syllabus would provide pupils with the knowledge and skills to
help them think critically and make decisions for themselves and their family
(CPDD, 2001).
In addition, there were only minor changes made to the areas of study in the 2002
syllabus. The components of Nutrition for the Family and Food Management were
combined to form Food and Nutrition, and continued to focus on the basic principles
of nutrition and food management. Creative Textiles was renamed Textiles and
Clothing, shifting the focus from decorative techniques to the basic principles of
178
textile design and function. Consumer Education remained unchanged, but
broadened to include topics on consumer awareness, money management and
informed decision-making (CPDD, 2001). Together, these three core areas formed
the ‘conceptual framework’ for the syllabus, in providing the content knowledge,
skills and attitudes to enable pupils to extend the concept of wellbeing beyond self to
family and community (CPDD, 2001)
The 2002 syllabus document contained important aspects in the Home Economics
curriculum to be covered, stated explicitly the expected learning outcomes, and
provided scope for links to be made across the areas of study. The syllabus guide
also highlighted that teachers should adjust the depth and breadth of their lessons to
meet the needs and abilities of their pupils. For example, pupils in Express course
could learn how to interpret and explain different product labels, those in Normal
(Academic) course could learn how to read different product labels, while those in
Normal (Technical) course could learn how to identify different product labels
(CPDD, 2001). Furthermore, teachers should incorporate all the following elements
in their schemes of work: National Education, ICT, thinking skills, coursework skills
and basic experimental methodology involving investigation skills (CPDD, 2001).
With regard to teaching approaches, the concept of ‘thematic approach’ was
introduced for the first time. According to CPDD (2001), modular lessons could be
developed by adopting the thematic approach, whereby related topics were
introduced around a central theme. This approach allowed for linkages of different
components and made learning more meaningful by placing learning in a context.
Students could come to understand the connections and relationships among ideas,
179
topics and skills within the content area; and learn to build links between new
information and experiences, and their prior knowledge (CPDD, 2004). For example,
a theme on Singapore culture could incorporate food practices of different ethnic
groups from Food and Nutrition, ethnic clothing designs from Textiles and Clothing,
and wise buying of local products from Consumer Education (CPDD, 2001).
There was also more information on the coursework assessment in the 2002 syllabus
guide. Differentiation in the coursework for the different courses was highlighted and
teachers should ensure they achieved this by setting different tasks and outcomes
(CPDD, 2001). Format of the coursework and detailed rubrics for assessing the
coursework for the different courses were inserted to help teachers carry out this
component more efficiently.
At a Home Economics Professional Meeting in 2005, Miss Soo Soon Imm, former
Home Economics Curriculum Planning Officer from the MOE, highlighted that
schools were given greater autonomy and flexibility to plan programmes and
strategies to stimulate and involve students in their own learning (CPDD, 2005).
Teachers were encouraged to plan Home Economics to suit the needs of their
students, as well as to provide students with opportunities to monitor their progress
and assess their performance.
She also mentioned that curriculum officers from the MOE would be conducting
more school visits. The objectives of the visits were: to discuss implementation
issues; to get to know the Home Economics teachers and understand how they
organise and plan activities for their department; to create a climate of sharing and
180
knowledge about best practices in schools; and to enable the officers to have a better
understanding of the challenges that schools faced (CPDD, 2005).
She further informed that the current Home Economics syllabus was undergoing
review and a new syllabus would be due for implementation in 2008. A different
approach, such as provision of core and electives was being considered, and other
modes of assessment were also being studied by the Syllabus Review Committee
(CPDD, 2005).
In the course of the oral history interviews, those participants who had the experience
in implementing the 2002 syllabus recounted that the MOE had certainly provided
more leeway for teachers to organise and carry out the revised Home Economics
curriculum in their schools. A retired Home economics teacher conveyed this
common observation in an oral history interview:
There were many sharing sessions organised by the MOE for teachers
to present their ideas and strategies in implementing the new syllabus.
The focus was to incorporate the different educational initiatives into
the Home Economics lessons to enhance pupils’ learning. School
visits from the curriculum officers also helped teachers to address any
problems they had encountered during the implementation.
After this point of the timeline, all participants of the oral histories were retired from
the education service. They were not involved in the formulation or implementation
of the successive Home Economics syllabi. Hence subsequent discussion does not
include further response from the oral history interviews.
181
2008: A revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented based on a six-year
review cycle
The MOE launched two educational initiatives on ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ and
‘Teach Less, Learn More’ in 2003 and 2004, respectively. In addition, the Ministry
also introduced a new policy by which a new set of syllabus would be implemented
in schools once every six year for every subject area. This policy implied that
curriculum development embraced a continuous cycle of implementation, evaluation
and improvement, in response to fluctuating social and economic factors (Yip et al.,
1997). Correspondingly, a revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented in
2008 as the curriculum was reviewed in a six-year cycle. This revised syllabus was
also aligned to support the educational initiatives on ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ and
‘Teach Less, Learn More’.
The initiative of ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ was disclosed by the then Acting
Minister for Education, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, in 2003. This initiative was
intended to nurture in students the spirit to innovate and try new ideas without undue
fear of failure, to meet the challenges of intense global competition. Mr Tharman
made the following illustration at a workshop organised by the MOE:
Innovation and enterprise is an attitude of mind, developing habits of
mind. At the core of it, innovation and enterprise is firstly, about
developing intellectual curiosity amongst all our children, a
willingness to think originally. Second, a spirit of initiative, and a
willingness to do something differently, even if there is a risk of
failure. And third, it’s about developing strength of character. The
182
ability to bounce back, try again, and the willingness to stand in team
– to lead a team, and to fight as a team (Tharman, 2004).
The ‘Teach Less, Learn More’ initiative was introduced by the Prime Minster, Mr
Lee Hsien Loong, during his inaugural National Day Rally Speech in 2004. He
specified that “we have to teach our student less so that they will learn more” (Lee,
2004). Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the then Minister for Education, spoke of this
initiative at the MOE Work Plan Seminar in 2005:
‘Teach Less, Learn More’ is not a call for ‘teachers do less’. It is a call
to educators to teach better, to engage our students and prepare them
for life, rather than to teach for tests and examinations (Tharman,
2005).
This initiative focussed on the fundamentals of effective teaching, by engaging
innovative instructional approaches to ensure students learn with understanding,
while de-emphasising the role and importance of rote learning and repetitive tests.
The aim of the ‘2008 Syllabus Home Economics Lower Secondary’ was to provide
students with knowledge and skills, and inculcate in them positive attitudes that
would empower them to make informed food and consumer choices in their daily life
(CPDD, 2007). According to the CPDD (2007), there were rapid changes in
Singapore in recent years as more people were eating out and increased spending on
household items. Young people were significantly affected by these changes in
lifestyle and many would have to make decisions on the purchase of food and other
consumer items. It was therefore crucial that the Home Economics programme
equipped them with the relevant life skills to enable them make informed choices for
183
everyday living. Hence the syllabus was revised to empower students to take these
responsibilities in making choices and decisions about health and daily needs
(CPDD, 2007).
The most significant changes in the 2008 syllabus were the organisation of the study
areas. The syllabus was now reorganised into two main areas of study, namely Food
Studies and Consumer Studies (CPDD, 2007). Food Studies replaced the former
Food and Nutrition component, while Consumer Studies replaced the previous
Consumer Education component. The component of Textiles and Clothing was
removed, as a result of changing lifestyle.
The CPDD (2007) pointed out that this reduction in content created a ‘white space’,
which was slot freed up in the curriculum time for teachers to implement modules
they developed. The intention was to incorporate the initiatives of ‘Innovation and
Enterprise’ and ‘Teach Less, Learn More’ into the curriculum. This white space gave
teachers room to experiment using different pedagogical approaches and assessment
modes, to promote engaged learning as well as to meet the needs of students. For
example, teachers could create modules of interest to extend students’ learning, such
as development of a food product, and investigation on types of food additives
(CPDD, 2007).
Apart from the changes in the study areas, the assessment structure in the 2008
syllabus remained unchanged, still involving both written paper and coursework.
184
The 2008 syllabus also emphasised suitable approaches in the teaching of Home
Economics. CPDD (2007) advocated experiential approach which allowed students
to relate and apply the knowledge gained in real-life situations. Three teaching
approaches that were highlighted in the syllabus guide included problem-based
learning, inquiry-based learning and differentiated instruction.
Problem-based learning utilised authentic and meaning problems to develop
problem-solving skills and enable independent and self-directed learning. For
example, an issue on school children not having regular breakfast would require
students to identify reasons for children not eating breakfast and suggest appropriate
ways to encourage them to eat regular breakfast (CPDD, 2007).
Inquiry-based learning engaged students through investigative activities to develop
their thinking, research and communication skills. For example, an assignment to
study and evaluate the health benefits claims on certain food products would require
students to gather evidence and formulate explanations based on existing knowledge
(CPDD, 2007).
Differentiated instruction reached out to meet the diverse range of abilities, needs
and interests in students. The strategies to carry out this approach could be through:
content - concepts differentiation for students of different abilities; process –
modification of activities to meet students’ needs; and products – completed product
to depend on students’ abilities and skill level (CPDD, 2007).
185
Sixth Phase: 2009-2014
2014: Home Economics renamed as Food and Consumer Education and a new
FCE syllabus was implemented
During the period 2009-2013, the 2008 syllabus was under constant review to
support formulating of the next syllabus, based on the six-year cycle in curriculum
development. Meanwhile in 2010, the Framework for 21st Century Competencies
and Student Outcomes was launched by the MOE. The Ministry (MOE, 2010b)
maintained that with the current education initiative to incorporate 21st Century
competences in the academic curriculum, schools would equip students with the
necessary knowledge, skills and values for living and working as adults in the 21st
Century.
In 2014, ‘Home Economics’ was renamed as ‘Food and Consumer Education’ and a
new FCE syllabus was implemented in the schools. The renaming was an effort to
move away from the traditional mindset of the subject, as well as to grant the subject
a more global outlook. The 2014 syllabus was also aligned to infuse the MOE
initiatives, especially the 21st Century competencies framework to inculcate the
learning of the 21st Century skills.
According to the CPDD (2014), the goal of the FCE syllabus was “to empower
students to be health-conscious and discerning consumers; enabling them to better
manage their lives for the present and the future”. The focus of the syllabus was on
“how individuals and families optimise their resources of food, finance and time to
meet their physical, mental, social and economic needs” (CPDD, 2014).
186
The FCE syllabus was organised into two compulsory Core Areas of Study, namely
Food Studies and Consumer Studies, and one Elective Module. The Core Areas of
Study would equip students with the core knowledge and practical skills on food,
nutrition and consumerism, to provide a strong foundation for everyday living in the
future (CPDD, 2014). Food Studies focussed on the major themes of Diet and Health
(comprising topics on meal planning and diet-related diseased) and Food
Management (comprising topics on methods of cooking, food and kitchen safety, and
food and culture). While Consumer Studies focussed on the main themes of Resource
Management (comprising topics on money management) and Consumer Awareness
(comprising topics on being an informed consumer and smart shopping).
On the other hand, the Elective Module allowed students to build upon the
knowledge from the Core Areas of Study and extend their learning in related topics
according to their interest (CPDD, 2014). Schools have the option in selecting one
Elective Module out of a choice of three, namely Nutrition and Food Science, Food
Entrepreneurship, and FCE and the Community, for the students to carry out a
project assignment.
Speaking at a regional Home Economics Conference in Singapore, the Senior
Parliamentary Secretary of Education and Manpower, Mr Hawazi Daipi, commented
that the design of the FCE syllabus “takes into account the demographic changes in
society” (The Straits Times online, 2013 July 16). More curriculum time in FCE
would be spent on financial education as Singapore grappled with rising costs and
household debt (The Straits Times online, 2013 July 16). The new syllabus would
187
place greater emphasis on teaching secondary school students about the
fundamentals of money management (The Straits Times online, 2013 July 16).
Likewise, the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, pointed out
during a financial education roadshow that Secondary 1 and 2 students could learn
how to manage their finances with the FCE programme, as teachers were being
roped in to help raise financial literacy among Singaporeans (The Sunday Times,
2013 October 20, p.21). He explained that this move was being rolled out as part of
the national programme ‘MoneySense’, aimed at addressing various financial issues
faced at different points in a person’s life. The Sunday Times (2013 October 20,
p.21) reported that the MOE would equip teachers with the necessary skills and
knowledge to make learning interesting and relevant. The aim was to provide
teenagers skills that they would find useful later in life. Correspondingly, Mr
Tharman mentioned that “we must start earlier, with teenagers” as “forming the right
attitudes towards spending and saving early in life goes a long way” (The Sunday
Times, 2013 October 20, p.21).
The ‘Food and Consumer Education Syllabus Lower Secondary 2014’ was an
extensive document that comprised of the syllabus outline and a ‘Teaching and
Learning Guide’ (CPDD, 2014). According to the CPDD (2014), the Teaching and
Learning Guide was to provide support for teachers in planning and delivering FCE
lessons, define the structure for assessing students’ learning, and suggest ideas for
planning the Elective Modules (CPDD, 2014). Specifically, the development of 21st
Century competencies was highlighted in the syllabus document. The link between
some learning outcomes in the FCE syllabus and the corresponding 21st Century
188
competencies were provided. For example, in discussing social issues affecting the
health and wellbeing of families and community, students would develop
competencies in civic literacy, global awareness and cross cultural skills (CPDD,
2014). Furthermore, using inquiry-based learning to teach FCE was emphasised,
showing a continuation of the teaching approach which was recommended in the
2008 syllabus.
However, there was a significant difference in the assessment structure in the new
syllabus. The component of coursework was now replaced by a project based on the
Elective Module, while the other component of written paper remained unchanged.
For the project, students would need to show application of core content and
knowledge from the Core Areas of Study and the selected Elective Module (CPDD,
2014). In addition, students would also be expected to display the application of
thinking skills in developing the task, such as analysis, research, decision making and
evaluation (CPDD, 2014). To help teachers cope with this change, detailed rubrics
for assessing the project and some examples on planning the Elective Modules were
presented in the new syllabus.
Conclusion
This chapter has revealed that the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has
evolved dramatically through major educational policies and initiatives, as well as
social and economic changes since Singapore attained independence. The analysis of
these changes to the content and design of the curriculum has uncovered a number of
key developments in the purpose and role of the subject.
189
One key development has been the shift in emphasis from preparing girls for basic
domestic duties to educating girls and boys to be wise consumers. In 1965, the
curriculum was gender-specific and focussed on basic household and motherhood
activities. The conservative society in that era perceived women to be the
homemaker in the family, hence it was deemed necessary to train the girls in
cookery, needlework and housekeeping skills. Although Singapore moved into rapid
industrialisation within 1970s to 1980s, the policy in allowing only girls to study
Home Economics was maintained. This indicated that the perception of women as
the main homemaker remained unchanged. However, the Home Economics
curriculum has evolved to focus on training girls to be household ‘managers’, in
response to the expanded role of women as the major purchaser of household items
in the family. In the updated syllabus, the domestic role of girls was reconceived to
include skills in managing of personal and family resources, and understanding of
child development. The major shift in paradigm occurred in 1994 when Home
Economics was made a compulsory subject for all lower secondary girls and boys.
The concept of domestic responsibility in the curriculum has changed from ‘women’
to ‘male-women shared’, as the policy recognised home-making being a partnership
between husband and wife. Hence the Home Economics curriculum was no more
gender biased and marked the liberation of women from their traditional domestic
role. Today, the role of the curriculum is to empower girls and boys to be health-
conscious and discerning consumers, and to impart the skills on better management
of resources to meet individual needs.
190
Another significant development has been the constant revisions of the syllabus to
incorporate the implementation of new educational initiatives. In 1980 a new
syllabus was issued due to the introduction of the New Education System, which
featured ability-based streaming to meet the differentiated needs of the students.
Then in 1999 and later in 2002 a transitional syllabus and fully revised syllabus were
implemented respectively, to incorporate the educational initiatives on ‘Thinking
Schools, Learning Nation’, ‘Information Technology Masterplan’ and ‘National
Education’ into the Home Economics curriculum. In 2008 the syllabus was revised
again to support the educational initiatives on ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ and ‘Teach
Less, Learn More’. The current (2014) syllabus was designed to infuse the new
initiative on the ‘Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes’,
which promotes the learning of 21st Century skills.
One other important development has been the shift in focus from training of
practical skills to inquiry-based learning and inculcation of values. The curriculum in
1965 focussed mainly on the learning of manipulative skills and practical
application. However from 1980s onwards the scope of the subject was expanded to
include management of personal and family resources, a respond to increased
consumerism in the society. The revised syllabi also initiated the inculcation of
values and attitudes in pupils. Importantly, the curriculum design has evolved from
the traditional technical approach to the critical science approach. Currently, the
focal point of the curriculum is on inquiry-based learning which engages decision
making and critical thinking skills, with the intent to train pupils to become creative
and resourceful problem-solvers.
191
Another significant development has been the streamlining of subject content to keep
up with changing lifestyle and relevancy in the society. Initially, the 1965 Domestic
Science syllabus consisted of five main areas of study, focussing on the different
domestic elements to develop manipulative skills. Then the subject content
underwent a series of consolidation and re-organisation which led to the formulation
of the various revised syllabi and a reduction in the areas of study. The 2014 FCE
syllabus was comprised of only two core areas of study, namely Food Studies and
Consumer Studies. This continuity in the food and cookery component indicated that
diet played a crucial role in a person’s health, regardless of any changes in society
and time period. The inclusion and expansion of the area in consumer education
demonstrated the growth of consumerism in modern society. The complete removal
of needlework and textiles from the curriculum revealed a changing lifestyle that
placed little value on understanding the knowledge in this area.
One further key development has been the revision of the subject name to signify
transformation in the direction of the curriculum, as well as to keep up with global
trends. In 1970, Domestic Science was renamed as Home Economics to reflect the
expanding roles of women, from performing basic domestic duties to executing
consumerism skills in managing household resources. Then, in 2014, the subject was
renamed as Food and Consumer Education to provide better alignment to changes in
the subject content, which involved application of consumer skills to a wider
environment, and the projection of a more professional image for the subject.
192
Chapter Six will discuss the key issues and current concerns of Home Economics
teachers with regard to the teaching of Home Economics in the different types of
Singaporean secondary schools.
193
CHAPTER SIX
ANALYTIC FINDINGS
This chapter reports the findings pertaining to the third research question addressed
by this study:
What were the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers regarding
the teaching of Home Economics in Singaporean secondary schools?
To reiterate, the findings were developed from data taken from semi-structured one-
to-one and focus group interviews with 18 selected Home Economics teachers from
Singapore mainstream, autonomous and independent schools. Selection was made
across the three types of schools to account for the possibility that type of school
would influence the approach taken to implement the syllabus. Interviews were
conducted with beginning and experienced Home Economics teachers to give
additional scope to the study, providing diversity in teaching experiences and points
of view.
As previously explained, ‘issues and concerns’ included teacher priorities as well as
challenges in respect to the teaching of Home Economics. As participants frequently
identified issues and concerns in teaching with student learning and learning
outcomes, the analysis also presents findings in relation to the teaching-learning
nexus.
The analysis identified seven specific thematic areas which attracted issues and
concerns. These areas were: aims and objectives of the curriculum; structure and
194
content of the syllabus; delivery of lessons; assessment of learning; teachers’
competency and training; organisational communication practices; and status and
perception of subject Home Economics. This chapter presents the findings of issues
and concerns for each of these areas.
Aims and Objectives of the Curriculum
The priority of teaching life skills
Across school types and experience levels, participants understood the aims and
objectives of the curriculum in terms of one particular priority, the teaching (and
learning) of what they typically termed ‘life skills’, a focus they identified from the
2014 FCE syllabus aim (CPDD, 2014) of empowering students to be health-
conscious and discerning consumers to enable them to be effective life managers.
Participants understood life skills as skills that were required in daily life and over
the course of life. They further interpreted life skills as skills needed to address the
challenges of modern society. That is, the urgency for skills and the nature of what
should be taught was affected by their understandings about the challenges and
conditions of living in contemporary Singapore. The particular domains participants
associated with ‘life skills’ were nutrition knowledge, consumer education and
culinary skills.
Nutrition knowledge qualified as a ‘life skill’ and therefore a priority teaching and
learning objective because it was needed on an everyday basis. For example:
195
We should focus on understanding basic nutrition knowledge and
practical cooking skills, as food and eating are daily affairs that
everybody need to handle in their daily living.
It was also a priority because it was seen to have a remedying effect. Nutritional
knowledge, in the general view of participants, could contribute to reducing or
preventing social ills, as caught in the comment below:
Since we are facing a global problem in obesity and diet-related
diseases, the understanding of nutrition concepts is important for
everyone to grasp. It is one preventive measure in reducing health
problems in our society, which we can provide support through our
Home Economics curriculum.
Consumer education’s status as a prioritised ‘life skill’ area was partly predicated on
understandings about the skills demanded in the modern environment of Singapore.
Participants believed that significant growth in consumerism in Singapore raised the
urgent need to teach students ‘life skills’ in response, in particular to generate skills
in financial literacy and the skills associated with being a discerning consumer,
managing individual and household budgets and making wise and informed
decisions that included “choosing their food products wisely”.
Participants also prioritised consumer education because they saw students relating
to it as valuable practical application. They believed that the practicality of the
subject motivated students to learn further and develop greater interest in Home
Economics. As one participant commented, “when students were able to put their
196
knowledge to good use, they relate better to the topics that were taught in class”.
Participants also saw the teaching of consumer education as a useful ‘life skill’
response to students accessing incorrect information found on the internet.
The positioning of culinary skills as an important component of ‘life skills’ and a
priority teaching and learning objective stemmed largely from understandings about
work and domesticity in Singapore. Many participants believed that with more
parents working full-time nowadays, there may be no one to perform tasks such as
cooking family meals. Hence these participants felt that students must be equipped
with essential ‘life skills’ to help them through in this kind of situation.
Other participants focussed on what they perceived as a lack of training in culinary
skills in the home as a reason for giving priority to this educational objective. For
example:
My concern is their lack of competency in cooking skills, as most of
them have the service of domestic helpers at home.
The importance of teaching process skills
In terms of issues and concerns about curriculum aims and objectives, another
emergent and associated theme arising in the analysis was the importance attributed
to teaching process skills. Participants clearly saw the Home Economics curriculum
as a means to this end. There was a shared view that Elective Modules in the FCE
syllabus, which allows students to extend and build upon their learning in the Core
Areas of Study, facilitated the development of these process skills.
197
Participants believed that through the Elective Modules project, students could
acquire process skills involving analysis, planning, research, execution, evaluation
and reflection. These process skills were regarded as critical enablers for students in
their daily encounters and their extended education experience. For example, the
following justification was offered for prioritising process skills:
At the tertiary level, there will be many study projects and research
assignments. Students will be able to utilise the process skills to
complete the work for their study tasks. And they may even perform
well as they were already familiar with these skills when they did their
Home Economics project in the secondary school.
Research and reflection skills were the key teaching and learning objectives of these
process skills, because they were viewed as critical to decision making and
performance. An example of this view:
Research skill is useful when one needs to gather thorough and
relevant information to make a wise decision. And reflection skill will
help a person to review and improve on his or her performance related
to any matter.
Structure and Content of the Syllabus
An ‘overloaded’ syllabus
A view frequently and energetically put was that the syllabus contained too many
components. As identified in Chapter Two, the structure of the new FCE syllabus
comprised of both the theoretical and practical aspects in the Core Areas of Study, as
198
well as a project in the Elective Modules. Participants across the different groups
reflected that there were too many components to deliver in the current FCE
syllabus. They pointed out that besides the teaching of theory, they were also
required to conduct practical lessons, and to instruct students to carry out the FCE
project.
There was a common perspective that correspondingly the amount of assignment
work to be completed by the students was ‘overloading’ for them too. The following
comment exemplified the participants’ view:
I also feel that the amount of work for the FCE project is too heavy for
our students. I have received queries from parents on the amount of
time that their children need to spend on this project work.
Another comment from a participant of an autonomous school expanded on this
common concern:
Since my school embarked on the Integrated Programme, our students
are expected to perform well in every area, and they are fully packed
with projects, tests and Co-Curriculum Activities. Therefore my
concern is to fulfil the requirements of the syllabus without
overloading the students. It is a challenge for me to load them with
more assignments and tests, on top of what they are already handling.
Interview respondents offered various examples of how they addressed the challenge
of an ‘overloaded’ curriculum. A common approach involved using out of class time,
for example “breakfast sessions”, to meet with students to assess how they were
199
coping with the work. The feedback gathered from students during these informal
sessions helped teachers gauge what adjustments to make to student workload.
One participant opined that since teachers in all schools would still be in the initial
phase of using the new FCE syllabus, they could observe how well the project in the
Elective Modules worked out, and then seek to fine-tune the syllabus to teach the
different components more effectively. Another participant offered the suggestion
that the design of the future curriculum should be “more pragmatic”, with the
syllabus created according to “the real situation” encountered in the schools.
‘Excessive’ scope in the theoretical content
It was a common view that the requirement to teach ‘too much’ content generated a
reduction in student interest in studying FCE. Some participants argued that
“common knowledge” should be removed from the content area and there were
claims that the covering of “too much theoretical content” reduced the amount of
time available for the practical sessions.
There was a strong view that the content area needed to provide “more time” for
students to develop their practical skills. For example, a participant commented:
With the cooking of dishes getting more sophisticated nowadays, it is
insufficient to learn only the basic cooking skills. There are also
students who have potential to do better; hence more time should be
given to develop their talent in this area.
200
Participants who did not have any theory examination for FCE in their schools
revealed that they were particularly affected by students lacked of interest in the
theory lessons. They also often contrasted disinterested students in theory sessions
with “very keen and engrossed” students in practical cooking sessions. The following
interpretation of these attitudes captures a common understanding of causality:
I think the reason for this concern is that most students feel that
academic tasks are boring, since nearly every subject in the school
required them to study theoretical knowledge. And because they do
not have much chance to cook at home, they would definitely
appreciate the opportunity to carry out cooking sessions in the school.
Interview respondents offered various suggestions for addressing the issue of ‘over-
detailed’ content. Several thought it would be beneficial to develop a link between
Consumer Education and Food Studies, so that topics could be integrated. Others
thought it would be more productive for the syllabus to focus on selected areas,
rather than covering ‘too many’ different topics.
Participants offered the example that since food and health-related areas were
important issues that everybody has to encounter every day, it would be relevant to
feature this content predominately in the future FCE syllabus. Another proposal was
that the future FCE curriculum should encompass all aspects of knowledge and skills
relevant to the subject, with the learning of entrepreneurship and creativity expanded
in the curriculum. This would make the subject “more interesting and appealing to
the younger generation”.
201
The questionable relevancy of specific content
Typically, for participants, the relevancy of the content in the FCE syllabus was an
‘issue’, with the criticism being that certain topics in the financial literacy segment
were “far too extended and complicated”. They argued that topics such as ‘credit
cards’ and ‘cheque payment’ were difficult and perhaps inappropriate for students of
a young age.
Some participants further reflected that the financial literacy segment should not
have been incorporated into the FCE syllabus. The following comment illustrated
those participants’ perspective on this matter:
With the amount of concepts that students are expected to learn in
financial literacy, it would be better to deliver this area on its own, for
example, through a series of workshop sessions.
An alternative ‘solution’ was that financial literacy should be embedded into the
other topics of the syllabus. Proponents of this view argued that since some of the
concepts were rather complex for young teenagers to comprehend, it would be easier
for them to learn if these concepts were incorporated into other related areas, such as
food studies.
The ‘inadequacy’ of resources
There was a general perspective with regard to insufficient resourcing for the
practical sessions pertaining to the syllabus. Participants highlighted the need to
upgrade the facilities in their school kitchens, claiming current equipment and
appliances were old and worn.
202
Several participants expressed their apprehension over the lack of a ‘kitchen helper’
to assist them in the practical sessions. This absence meant they spent “extra time”
handling preparations. Typically, they attributed the cause to budget constraints in
their schools, as well as “inadequate support” from school management ‘because’
Home Economics was not regarded as a core subject.
Flexibility to ‘customise’ the syllabus
Another emergent theme related to the structure and content of the syllabus was the
flexibility to customise the syllabus in the independent schools. Although the MOE
has issued a standard FCE syllabus for implementation in schools, interview
respondents from the independent schools shared a common understanding that they
had the concession to customise the syllabus according to their schools’ needs. This
view is unsurprising as independent schools in Singapore, as previously explained,
enjoy greater autonomy and flexibility in curricular innovations and implementations
of their school programmes. Respondents reported adopting distinct custom-built
syllabi in teaching the subject.
Participants from the independent schools designed their syllabus according to
student profile and school needs. Participants from two (all-girls) independent
schools revealed that they included the needlework component in their syllabi, even
though the MOE has removed this study area from the FCE syllabus. Said one:
We want our students to understand the creative use of textiles for
daily living. Hence to incorporate our school needs, we have included
203
needlework in the Home Economics syllabus to train our girls in basic
sewing skills and doing simple craftwork.
Similarly, some participants reflected that their needlework component focussed on
hand-sewing skills, without the use of sewing machines. They specified that, for
example, students learnt about the stitching of buttons and sewing of embroidery on
aprons with design created by the students themselves.
Participants from another independent school indicated that they had renamed the
subject as ‘Food Studies’, because their school focussed on providing students with a
good foundation in health, nutrition and food science. These participants believed
that the new name better reflected the aims and objectives of the subject. They
described the procedure which they took to effect the name change:
Initially, we wrote to the MOE to seek approval for the name change.
And once we received the approval, we then informed the school
management to change the subject name officially in the school.
They shared that their students would learn about the general concepts of nutrition
and cookery in Secondary One, and then would be given the option to choose a
specific skill-based module, such as cake-making or pastry-making, in Secondary
Two. They explained that this was in line with the practice of ‘personalised
curriculum’ for the Secondary Two cohort in their school, whereby students could
have different options to customise their own curriculum, based on their interest and
ability.
204
Delivery of Lessons
‘Insufficiency’ of assigned curriculum time
In relation to the delivery of lessons, insufficiency of curriculum time assigned for
the teaching of FCE was a key emergent theme. Many interview respondents across
the different groups emphasised that it was a huge challenge to deliver so much
information during the FCE lessons, given the limited amount of designated
curriculum hours.
Participants also reported that allocated curriculum time could be cut down further,
due to public holidays and compulsory activities set by the school. Hence it was not
easy for them to fulfil the requisite of the syllabus completely. A typical view is
presented below:
I always feel the rush to cover the syllabus within a short time span. I
would be grateful if there is more time for me to carry out my basic
teaching and practical lessons.
In addition, some participants revealed that this issue had hindered them being
creative in their lessons. They also felt that they were not able to stretch their
students’ capacity further, especially for those students who displayed potential and
were keen to learn more.
There was also a common perspective relating to insufficient time to carry out
practical lessons, if the school did not plan the timetable appropriately. Participants
expressed the need to designate double (teaching) periods to deliver the practical
205
sessions, because students would require adequate time to prepare the ingredients,
cook the dishes, wash the soiled equipment, as well as tidy up their work stations.
Nevertheless a number of participants pointed out that they found solutions to coping
with this issue of insufficient curriculum time. For example:
The approach that I used was to carry out remedial lessons to
complete the teaching of the content and to do the project work.
Although this has increased my work load as I need to conduct these
remedial classes on top of my regular curriculum hours, it is the most
effective way to ensure that I can complete the whole syllabus.
Another respondent shared that she engaged the post-examination period to
implement different innovative programmes, such as ‘supermarket educational tour’
and ‘healthy cooking competition’, to enhance and motivate students’ learning of
FCE.
The need to benchmark the quality of teaching
Another emergent theme associated with the delivery of the lessons was the need to
benchmark the quality of teachers’ teaching. Interview respondents, particularly the
beginning teachers, expressed their apprehension on the ‘absence’ of an indicator to
gauge the proficiency level of teachers’ teaching, as well as the progress of the
subject in schools. The common perspective was that the MOE should provide a set
of criteria to help teachers measure their capability in delivering the lessons, and to
ascertain if their schools’ Home Economics programme was moving in the right
direction.
206
Beginning teachers frequently commented that to overcome this need for
benchmarking, they sought support from their peers teaching in other schools. An
example:
As some of my peers are faced with the similar concern in their
schools, we have created a ‘Facebook’ group to collaborate and share
on our practices in the delivery of the lessons. We believe that this
could help us to measure our performance and achievement in
teaching the subject.
Useful strategies to enhance lessons delivery
Interview respondents across the different groups shared a common ‘concern’ with
finding ways to enhance lessons delivery. They identified a number of useful
strategies which they had utilised in their classrooms.
A common approach was to ensure students were clear about teacher expectations
“right from the beginning”, and at “every following” lesson. A standard technique
when meeting new students for the first time was to explain the objectives in
studying the subject, as well as what students were expected to achieve through the
lessons. The ‘kitchen orientation’ was a common strategy:
My students need to go through a kitchen orientation during the first
cooking session. I will explain and make them understand all ground
rules and expectations, with regard to carrying out practical lessons in
the kitchen.
207
Another common strategy to enhance lessons delivery was the utilisation of
“demonstrations”. Participants shared that they would demonstrate how to prepare
and cook the dishes during every practical lesson. This was to ensure that students
understand the proper procedure to follow before they carried out the cooking on
their own.
Participants also reported on engaging Information Technology to enhance lessons
delivery. Some participants reflected their schools set up online system to monitor
the number of tests and assignments that students need to manage every week. They
explained that the objective of the online system was to ensure that students were not
overwhelmed with projects and tests set by the different subject areas.
In addition, teachers from an autonomous school shared that their school
implemented a specialised ICT programme and adopted the pedagogy of ‘flipped
classroom’ to enhance teaching and learning. They disclosed that all students in their
school were issued with a Chrome notebook, and learning resources for all subjects
were fully uploaded onto the school website. They justified the benefits of engaging
this pedagogy as follows:
The ‘flipped classroom’ reinforce on both self-directed learning and
collaborative learning, as students need to read up the materials at
home before the specific lesson, and carry out activities in the
classroom during the actual lesson. Teachers would use the curriculum
time to expand on students’ learning, rather than just focus on the
teaching of content area.
208
Another strategy involved collaboration between different subject areas, for example,
teachers working closely with the Physical Education (PE) Department in their
schools so that they would not repeat the same topics that were taught by the PE
teachers. It was pointed out that some topics in the FCE curriculum, such as the
concepts of ‘Body Mass Index’ and ‘energy balance’, were also included in the PE
syllabus. Hence they would collaborate with the PE teachers in planning the lessons,
so that these topics would not be taught again during the FCE lessons. The
curriculum time that was freed up could then be used to conduct other activities, such
as implementing extra practical sessions to improve on the students’ culinary skills.
Interview respondents from the independent and autonomous schools utilised
differentiated instruction to enhance lessons delivery. As their schools offered both
the Integrated Programme (IP) and GCE (Ordinary Level), students in the IP had a
higher academic capability than those in the GCE (Ordinary Level) track. Although a
similar Home Economics curriculum was implemented for each of the two different
tracks, differentiated instruction was carried out according to the students’ ability.
Below is an example of the use of this strategy:
Our students on the IP and GCE (Ordinary Level) track are exposed to
differentiated learning experiences. For example, there is different
demand in their Home Economics project. Students in the IP have to
conduct extra investigative task, but students in the GCE (Ordinary
Level) track only need to complete the general research process.
Interview respondents from one school used Home Economics as a means of
inculcating school philosophy:
209
My school wants to achieve ‘Kim Gek’, which implies a wholesome
development of the student in ‘Peranakan’ culture. Because this strong
‘Peranakan’ background is unique to my school, it is up most
important to achieve this goal. Therefore we make an effort to infuse
this idea and mission into our Home Economics curriculum.
Participants at this school taught students how to prepare ‘Peranakan’ dishes using
special herbs and spices from the school garden, perceiving this as a strategy to
reinforce students’ understanding and appreciation of the ‘Peranakan’ culture.
Assessment of Learning
Deviations in the assessment format
The key emergent theme here was deviations in the extent or range of the assessment
format practiced in the different types of schools. The 2014 FCE syllabus provided
assessment format and guidelines to evaluate students’ learning. However, across the
range and between the different school types, there were departures from the
regulation format and guidelines.
In the independent schools, a particular departure was that there was no assessment
of theoretical knowledge and no written test/examination prescribed in assessment
plans. Participants at these schools understood assessment to be based on project and
practical lessons instead, with a grade awarded at the end of the course. Participants
whose schools included the needlework component in the syllabus assessed students
on their craft work and sewing products. Other participants assessed students on class
presentation for their project work.
210
For participants from autonomous and mainstream schools, assessment formats were
influenced by whether a school offered Food and Nutrition in the upper secondary. If
students were given the option to study Food and Nutrition, the FCE assessment
would include both the written paper and project. However, if the school did not
offer Food and Nutrition to the students, there would be some modification in the
FCE assessment, which usually involved removing the written paper. The following
comment exemplifies this situation:
My school catered to students from the three different courses,
including Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical). As
only students from the Normal (Academic) course are given the option
to study Food and Nutrition in the upper secondary level, we imposed
a stricter assessment format in FCE for this course. Students in the
Normal (Academic) course need to sit for a theory examination, but
there is no theory examination for students in the Express and Normal
(Technical) courses. Furthermore, the assessment weighting in the
FCE project is higher for the Normal (Academic) course. We took this
action to prepare our Normal (Academic) students for the rigor and
demand of the Food and Nutrition curriculum, if they choose to study
this subject later in upper secondary.
These respondents typically also maintained that without the demand to assess
theoretical knowledge, they could conduct more activities to develop students’
learning in other areas, such as culinary skills.
211
Setting ‘appropriate’ expectations in assessment of student learning
There was a general belief that the standard of the FCE assessment format was set
too high, particularly the project in the Elective Modules. Participants remarked that
the assessment format could “look good on paper”, but it must also be “realistic and
workable”. The comment below is illustrative of this perspective:
I have students from three different courses with different learning
ability, it is a massive task to prepare different scheme of work that
catered to these diverse groups. And it is especially not easy to adjust
the assessment format for the Normal (Academic) and Normal
(Technical) courses, as I feel that the expectations are beyond the
competency that students from these groups can perform.
Participants believed that the assessment format should have considered more
carefully variations in the students’ learning ability, and be more realistic regarding
available curriculum time to complete all the tasks. They maintained that to create a
better assessment format for the future syllabus, the MOE curriculum officers should
visit the different types of schools to observe the Home Economics teachers in
action, and to gather feedback from teachers of all positions (not restricting to only
those at the senior level).
There was general agreement on the need to reduce the affiliation between FCE and
the upper secondary Food and Nutrition syllabus. Many Home Economics teachers
thought they focussed “too much” on the assessment of the FCE project, due to the
importance of the project component in the Food and Nutrition syllabus. The
212
association of these two subjects was counterproductive, as caught in the comment
below:
Usually most teachers would spend a great deal of time to coach their
students in the FCE project assessment, as they believe that it is
important to prepare students for the related Food and Nutrition option
in upper secondary. But we understand that this action would restrict
teachers from developing further learning in FCE, due to the limited
curriculum time allocated for the subject.
The view was that without this constraint of excessive focus on the project
assessment, Home Economics teachers could more flexibly strengthen the learning of
the subject, and be able to plan and carry out more interesting and creative activities
for the FCE lessons.
Teachers’ Competency and Training
‘Inadequacies’ in the teachers’ training programme
The key issue in relation to teachers’ competency and training was that there were
serious inadequacies in the teachers’ training programme which prepared new
teachers for their role. Interview respondents, and particularly the beginning teachers,
believed that knowledge presented in the teachers’ training programme was not
sufficient to satisfactorily develop their proficiency in teaching the subject and to
conduct the practical lessons. They called for relevant training courses in culinary
and project work skills to improve their competency. Moreover, there were calls for
213
better training programme and opportunities for higher qualifications from teachers
across the different groups.
Beginning teachers were apprehensive that they had not acquired the skills for
competency in their teaching of the subject. An example of such a perspective:
I am worried about my insufficient competency to conduct the FCE
project. I know that there are different process skills to teach the
students, and I also have to ensure that they understand the proper
procedure to complete the task. But I feel that my training did not
provide me the necessary knowledge that would empower me to
prepare my students for this component.
There was a general view that some content taught in the training programme, for
example ‘clothing and textile’, was not relevant to the current FCE curriculum.
Beginning teachers also typically were lacking confidence in their ability to
independently conduct the practical lessons:
I am not confident to carry out the practical cooking sessions on my
own, without any guidance from my mentor teacher. I always have to
observe her for the first lesson to understand the proper equipment to
prepare and correct method to employ, before I could proceed to
conduct the lesson on my own.
Likewise, experienced teachers believed that training for new teachers was
insufficient, particularly in respect to achieving appropriate culinary skills.
214
Beginning teachers felt they need training in practical cooking skills and in the
“proper procedure” for conducting the project work. After-work training classes were
seen as impractical because of time constraints and there was a general view that
current training courses were too “superficial”, focussing just on the cooking of
specific dishes. There was a strong desire for training organisers to gather feedback
from teachers to develop more useful and relevant courses:
There is a need to provide more courses on the pedagogy of teaching,
specifically in the teaching of FCE. It is also important to conduct
seminars to keep teachers up-to-date on the latest trend and
development in our subject and related areas.
Participants across the different groups specified the need for a “better designed”
training framework to prepare new teachers for their role. Suggestions included: the
NIE could conduct courses to help beginning teachers bridged the gap between
previous learning and the demands of teaching the subject; and teachers training
institutions (including the NIE and MOE) should work closely together to plan and
coordinate the teachers’ training programme:
With a more effective teachers’ training programme, beginning
teachers will not need to spend extra time to attend training courses
immediately when they are posted to schools. This could allow them
to focus on their work in school, and also help them to reduce the
stress of setting out on a new role.
There was a general desire for more opportunities to improve qualifications. It was
felt, in particular, that those who possessed only “basic diploma qualifications”
215
should be encouraged to take up undergraduate studies at university, which would
enable them to improve on their levels of professional competency. Participants also
hoped that if all Home Economics teachers could obtain at least a bachelor degree, it
would help to promote the status of the subject in schools.
The need for better guidance and mentoring for new teachers posted to schools
Another emergent theme with regard to teachers’ competency and training was the
issue of insufficient or irregular mentoring and guidance for new teachers posted to
schools. Participants believed it was critical that new teachers were posted to schools
with existing experienced teachers who could support and guide them in their new
role. They found this practice did not always occur. For example:
When both of us were posted to this school after our teachers’
training, there were no other Home Economics teachers in the
department. All the previous Home Economics teachers had left the
service or were on long-term leave. As we were the only Home
Economics teachers in the school, we had to plan and implement the
programme according to our own knowledge and experience. It was
really difficult for us because we did not have appropriate support and
guidance.
Reinforcing the need for a consistent approach to providing beginning teachers with
guidance were the sentiments of those who had experienced such guidance:
Although I am rather new in the teaching service, I do not have any
concerns in delivering the subject in my school. The other two Home
Economics teachers in my department are very experienced and they
216
have already set up a good platform to carry out the programme. They
have also been very helpful and are always around to guide me on my
teaching journey.
Organisational Communication Practices
The need for professional sharing among teachers of different schools
The need to have more professional sharing among Home Economics teachers at
different schools was a key emergent theme. The common view was there were “not
enough sharing sessions” being delivered by schools:
More activities could be planned and organised for our Home
Economics teachers. This may include programme that would
generate more cohesiveness between the teachers, such as sharing
sessions. The MOE should promote more professional sharing by
organising these sessions at the cluster and national level. These
sharing sessions can encourage Home Economics teachers from
different schools to learn from one another, and also to work together
as a team.
Participants saw professional sharing sessions as opportunities too, to be informed on
the latest developments in the subject area, strengthen the professional network of the
Home Economics fraternity and promote the status of FCE in the school systems.
217
The need to improve communication and coordination between relevant
organisations
The key issue that emerged here was the need to enhance communications between
the Ministry and schools in relation to FCE. This was of a particular concern for
respondents from the independent schools, who reported that the Home Economics
departments in their schools were not within the communication network of the
MOE.
They maintained that it was crucial to bridge the communication gap between the
Ministry and their schools, especially when they did not adhere fully to the FCE
syllabus issued by the Ministry. A comment from a participant of an independent
school captures the view:
I did not receive any information or messages from the MOE in
relation to our subject. Thus I felt that I am left on my own without
any support from the Ministry. I believe that Home Economics
teachers in the independent schools should also be updated on subject
matters and be given the proper support by the MOE, just like any
other school.
Participants sometimes took the initiative in establishing communications with the
Ministry. Typically, they contacted the MOE curriculum specialist assigned to their
school zone to establish a communication channel and request for support. They
hoped that this external support from the Ministry would help them to improve on
the implementation of the curriculum in their schools.
218
There was a strong view that the organisations relevant to the FCE subject, including
the MOE, NIE, HPB and the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority, should coordinate
and work together as a whole, when communicating to schools and teachers any
information with regard to the subject. Participants believed having “a single source”
for information would greatly assist them in their professional lives.
Status and perception of subject Home Economics
The key emergent theme here was that the objectives and rationale of Home
Economics was largely misunderstood in schools and in the public domain. There
were complaints that the subject was simply misconceived as being entirely
concerned with training students in the domestic tasks, such as cooking and sewing.
There were anecdotes of colleagues in other teaching areas remarking that the subject
was “easy to teach”.
The frustration of the participants at the representation of their subject is caught in
the comment below:
Students, parents, colleagues and even school management have the
perception that Home Economics or FCE only deals with cooking
skills and nothing else. They are not aware about the other aspects
covering nutrition knowledge, food science and consumer education
which our subject also intent to teach the students.
Participants typically were adamant that misconceptions should be rectified:
219
Home Economics or FCE may not be a core subject, but it should be
not regarded as a non-essential subject that could easily be removed
from the school curriculum. The values of this subject should be
illustrated to all the stakeholders, and the benefits of learning this
subject should be highlighted to the public.
There were strategies employed to promote better understanding of the subject.
These included working with a range of school committees to organise various
activities, such as ‘recycling projects’ and ‘healthier choice supermarket tour’, to
raise awareness on the objectives of studying Home Economics/FCE.
There was also the tactic of bringing the public into the classroom:
My school gives support to teachers who are creative in implementing
their lessons. Hence I have invited chefs, dieticians and financial
planner to speak to our students, in relation to the learning of FCE. I
believe this would demonstrate the diversity of the current syllabus,
and generate more interest in the subject area. Hopefully these
activities could also change the wrong mindset that people have about
FCE.
School hierarchies were often perceived to be contributing to the problem. There was
a shared conviction that school management needed to improve understandings of
the requirements that Home Economics teachers have to fulfil in the subject, and do
not viewed the subject as less important in the curriculum. Participants maintained
that if school management had taken relevant actions to support the Home
220
Economics department, most of the issues which teachers encountered should be
resolved.
There was a general view that the name change from Home Economics to FCE was a
positive assault on misconceptions. However, for many teachers, raised status
required progressive leadership in the subject:
I believe that in order to change the wrong mindset that others have
about our subject, we must have passionate and like-minded people to
head the subject. These people must be able to raise the profile of our
subject and move it forward.
Conclusion
This chapter has presented the analytic findings on the current issues and concerns of
the Home Economics teacher participants regarding the teaching (and learning) of
Home Economics in Singaporean secondary schools. A summary of the findings,
which is the seven emergent thematic areas and the key issues and concerns pertinent
to each area, is displayed in Figure 7.
Thematic Areas Key Issues and Concerns
Aims and objectives of the curriculum
The priority of teaching life skills
The importance of teaching process skills
Structure and content of the syllabus
An ‘overloaded’ syllabus
‘Excessive’ scope in the theoretical content
221
The questionable relevancy of specific content
The ‘inadequacy’ of resources
Flexibility to ‘customise’ the syllabus
Delivery of lessons ‘Insufficiency’ of assigned curriculum time
The need to benchmark the quality of teaching
Useful strategies to enhance lessons delivery
Assessment of learning
Deviations in the assessment format
Setting ‘appropriate’ expectations in assessment of student learning
Teachers’ competency and training
‘Inadequacies’ in the teachers’ training programme
The need for better guidance and mentoring for new teachers posted to schools
Organisational communication practices
The need for professional sharing among teachers of different schools
The need to improve communication and coordination between relevant organisations
222
Figure 7. Summary of the analytic findings on key issues and concerns of Home
Economics teachers regarding the teaching (and learning) of Home Economics in
Singaporean secondary schools
The following chapter, Chapter Seven, will present a discussion of the overall
findings pertaining to all three research questions.
Status and perception of subject Home Economics
The need to raise the status of Home Economics
The need to eliminate misconceptions of Home Economics as ‘domestic training’
223
CHAPTER SEVEN
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
To reiterate, the overarching aim of this research was to develop understandings of
Home Economics in Singapore, where no such studies exist. To this end, the study
had three specific aims:
1. To investigate the history of the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from Singapore’s independence in 1965 to 2008.
2. To investigate developments in the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from 2008 to 2014.
3. To investigate the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers
regarding the teaching of Home Economics in three different types of
secondary schools in Singapore, namely, mainstream schools, autonomous
schools and independent schools.
The preceding two chapters presented the findings on these aims. This chapter draws
on findings across the historical inquiry, the findings regarding curriculum
developments 2008 to 2014, and the research into teachers’ issues and concerns to
discuss the development and implementation of the Home Economics curriculum.
The chapter is in two main sections. The first section focuses on how the
development and direction of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore has
been influenced by factors external to Singapore and by factors directly related to
Singapore’s needs and agendas. The discussion considers therefore (1) the influence
of global trends in Home Economics education on the curriculum in Singapore and
(2) the influence of national objectives and government policies on the curriculum.
224
This section largely draws on findings related to the first two research aims,
essentially therefore drawing on the historical study made of the curriculum.
The second section of the chapter focuses on the achievements and challenges of the
contemporary Home Economics curriculum, reflected in the 2014 syllabus. This
section draws particularly on the findings from study interviews with teachers
implementing the 2014 syllabus in the secondary schools.
A final discussion at the end of the chapter summarises the value of this study, with
regard to understanding the development of the Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore.
Influences on the Development of the Home Economics Curriculum in
Singapore
Global trends in Home Economics education
This study has identified four major global trends in education which have
influenced the development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. These
trends are: the long movement towards gender equity; the need to facilitate the
development of flexible and transferable skills; the need to address the demands and
challenges of an increasingly consumerist societies; and the utilisation of ICT.
The influence of gender equity
In education, one of the consequences of the push for gender equity has been broader
opportunities for girls and women. This trend has been evident for some time. For
225
example, in 1988, the Teachers of Home Economics Specialist Association (THESA)
observed that Home Economics globally had evolved from an initial purpose of
training women in basic household skills to encompassing financial management
roles and social wellbeing. More recently, Smith and deZwart (2011) reported that
the pursuit of gender equity was expressed in Home Economics in terms of
teaching/learning objectives oriented towards broader participation for women in
social, business and global areas.
The findings of this study are in line with these observations, that is, they reveal there
has been a movement towards providing through the Home Economics curriculum
broader opportunities for women. The history described in Chapter Five identified
that in the early years from Independence, from 1965-1969, Home Economics in
Singapore was focussed on training girls in ‘basic household skills’, notably sewing,
cooking and cleaning. The subject was known as ‘Domestic Science’, as the
objective was for girls to develop manipulative skills in basic domestic and
motherhood activities.
In 1970, there emerged evidence of an ‘evolution’ in the subject, as influenced by the
broader international currents of social change, lessons on making purchases and
managing home budgets were introduced into the Home Economics syllabus in
Singapore. That year, too, the subject name ‘evolved’ to ‘Home Economics’ to
reflect the expanded role of women as household ‘managers’.
A further consequence of the global push for gender was an increasing understanding
or expectation that men and women should both contribute to managing the
226
household and child-rearing. One consequence internationally was the inclusion of
boys in Home Economics education (Smith & deZwart, 2011).
The findings of this study show this effect in Singapore Home Economics education,
too. As described in Chapter Five, for several decades from Independence (1965-
1994) Home Economics in Singapore was offered only to girls (in secondary school).
In 1984, there was an outcry from the public when the MOE announced that Home
Economics was to be a compulsory subject for all lower secondary girls from 1985.
According to the Straits Times (1984 November 24, p.21), a petition signed by 428
people urged the MOE to offer Home Economics to all students. The petition argued
that boys could not learn that they have an important role to play in the family if they
do not study Home Economics, and that offering the subject to a wider population of
students would also help to maximise use of Singapore’s limited pool of talent (The
Straits Times, 1984 November 24, p.21).
In response, the then Parliamentary Secretary of Education, Mr Ho Kah Leong,
explained that boys were not offered study in Home Economics because of the
shortage of teachers (The Straits Times, 1984 November 27, p.1). He clarified that
the MOE would like boys to do Home Economics hence more teachers would be
encouraged to take up training in this subject to ease the shortage.
In 1994, Home Economics was made a compulsory subject for all lower secondary
girls and boys (The Straits Times, 1991 July 11, p.23). The rationale behind the
policy change was disclosed by the then Minister of State for Education, Dr Seet Ai
227
Mee, who explained that Singapore’s changing socio-economic norms where both
parents worked full time meant that men and women would have to play
complementary roles in managing the household, hence “a Home Economics
programme for boys and girls will pave the way towards shared responsibility in the
home” (Seet, 1991).
Hence the revised 1994 syllabus was aimed at ensuring both girls and boys were
equipped for their future roles at work and in the family, through improved
management of personal and family resources. Emphasising that the subject was no
longer reserved for a female audience, topics on personal grooming and hygiene
related to females were removed from the syllabus. To reiterate from that chapter, the
philosophy of the revised 1994 Home Economics syllabus specified explicitly the
important role of men “to provide support to their women folk through partnership in
the house” (CPD, 1994).
Gender equity maintained its influence on subsequent Home Economics syllabi. For
example, the 2002 syllabus was designed to provide the knowledge and skills to help
students think critically and “make decisions for themselves and their family”
(CPDD, 2001). The 2008 syllabus had a goal of enabling students to “take
responsibility and make informed choices about health and daily needs” (CPDD,
2007), and the 2014 syllabus focussed on how “individuals and the families could
optimise their resources to better manage their lives for the present and the future”
(CPDD, 2014).
228
The findings of this study clearly show that the design of the Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore has responded to global socio-economic changes towards
gender equity. The approach can be considered quite progressive, when considered in
terms of Singapore’s neighbours.
For example, Noda (2005) observed that while Home Economics in Japan was a co-
educational subject which promoted gender-equal education, the subject had
provided the notion that women should be freed from domestic responsibilities,
rather than that both men and women should share such responsibilities.
As a further example, Ma and Pendergast (2011) reported that Home Economics in
Hong Kong was offered to both boys and girls in co-educational schools, but there
was still gender imbalance as limited number of boys chose to study the subject
because of gender stereotyping and devaluing of the discipline.
The need for flexible and transferable skills
Through the last decade of the 20th Century and into the present, there has been a
powerful global trend in education towards teaching/learning for broad skills bases
and for problem-solving approaches. (This push is often seen as a consequence of
globalisation and post-industrialisation (Levy & Murnane, 2007)).
Findings from this study reveal that the design of the Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore has been influenced by this trend. In 1994, a revised syllabus emphasised
knowledge and skills that would enable students to become creative and resourceful
problem-solver and decision-makers (CPD, 1994). The 1994 syllabus heeded the
229
global trend to engage practical reasoning and critical thinking through incorporating
“problem-solving skills, decision making skills” and “experiential learning” during
lessons delivery (CPD, 1994).
Successively, the 1999 syllabus focussed on “infusing thinking skills” in the lessons
(CPDD, 1998) and the 2002 syllabus sought to enable students to “think critically
and make decisions for themselves and their family” (CPDD, 2001).
In 2008, implementation of a revised syllabus highlighted the teaching approaches of
problem-based learning and inquiry-based learning which allowed students to relate
and apply knowledge learnt in real-life situations (CPDD, 2007).
According to the CPDD (2007), problem-based learning utilised authentic and
meaning problems to develop problem-solving skills, while inquiry-based learning
engaged students through investigative activities to develop their thinking, research
and communication skills.
The 2014 FCE curriculum was designed to incorporate the learning of ‘21st Century
competencies’, to equip students with the necessary knowledge, skills and values for
living and working as adults in the 21st Century (CPDD, 2014).
Responding to consumerism
Worldwide, increased urbanisation, industrialisation and globalisation have led to an
expansion in consumerism. Stearns (2006) traced the beginnings of this process back
to the early 20th Century. Whatever the date of its stirring, consumerism has become
230
a very significant international phenomenon throwing up challenges for education
(and curriculum design).
According to Smith and de Zwart (2011), Home Economics was the only subject
area that focussed on everyday life and meeting basic needs, such as enabling
students to practice and gain competency in making financial decisions that apply to
food, clothing, shelter and family living choices, which people had to handle over the
life-span.
Lichtenstein and Ludwig (2010) emphasised the role of Home Economics education
to combat the trends of obesity and diet-related diseases (arguably, negative
consequences of consumer societies), by equipping young adults with the skills
essential to lead long healthy lives. In a similar vein, Veit (2011) argued that Home
Economics could address the health ‘crisis’ of obesity by teaching cooking skills and
healthy eating.
Consumerism is associated with spiralling personal (and community) debt. Graham
(2013) observed basic financial literacy was more important than ever as debt and
credit card payments escalated in society and argued that a solution was the revival
of Home Economics classes to provide young people with the skills to shop
intelligently, cook healthily, manage money, and to live well.
The findings of this study show that the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
has been influenced by the need to address the experiences and challenges of
‘consumerism’. In 1970, faced with the global socio-economic changes of increasing
231
purchases of household items, Home Economics in Singapore incorporated
knowledge and skills in consumer education and the management of household
resources into the syllabus.
As mentioned earlier, the subject was also renamed as ‘Home Economics’ to
embrace the training of consumerism skills in managing household resources. The
then Parliamentary Secretary of Education, Mr Ahmad Matter, declared at a Home
Economics forum that Singapore must guide the young “to keep abreast of new
thinking and products in an increasing technological society” and also provide them
with “sound knowledge and judgement in consumer choice” (Matter, 1975).
In 1980 and 1985, two new Home Economics syllabi were implemented and the
focus of the subject was amended to provide greater scope on consumerism related
areas. The 1980 syllabus aimed to train students in the management of personal and
family resources of relevance to living (MOE, 1980), while the 1985 syllabus
encompassed lessons on wise consumerism in relation to comparative buying of food
items, as well as buying, caring and wearing of ready-made clothing (MOE, 1985).
In 1994, the implementation of a revised syllabus with the intention “to prepare
students for adult life” saw the re-organisation of the main areas of study to
incorporate a specific area on ‘Consumer Education’, which focussed on comparative
buying and shopping wisely for food and clothes (CPD, 1994). In the 2002 syllabus,
Consumer Education expanded to include topics on consumer awareness, money
management and informed decision-making (CPDD, 2001).
232
The significance of consumerism was apparent in the 2008 and 2014 syllabi as the
different areas of study in the past syllabi were consolidated into two main areas,
namely Food Studies and Consumer Studies. According to the CPDD (2007), as
more people were eating out and increased spending on household items, young
people were significantly affected by these rapid changes in lifestyle and many
would have to make decisions on the purchase of food and other consumer items.
Hence the 2008 syllabus aimed to provide students with knowledge and skills that
will “empower them to make informed food and consumer choices in their daily life”
(CPDD, 2007).
In 2014, the subject was renamed as ‘Food and Consumer Education’, to provide
better alignment to changes in the subject content which involved application of
consumer skills to a wider environment. The 2014 syllabus focussed on “how
individuals and families optimise their resources of food, finance and time to meet
their physical, mental, social and economic needs” (CPDD, 2014).
The main themes of Consumer Studies in the 2014 syllabus comprised of Resource
Management (including topics on money management) and Consumer Awareness
(including topics on being an informed consumer and smart shopping). The inclusion
and expansion of consumer education in the syllabus design demonstrated the
influence of consumerism on the implementation of the Home Economics curriculum
in Singapore.
233
Utilisation of ICT
A further major global trend of influence on the design and implementation of Home
Economics in Singapore has been the utilisation of ICT in education. As with most
other subjects, Home Economics is expected to utilise ICT. For example, the IFHE
(2009) maintained that Home Economics education should make use of the
opportunities which digital learning offers and make appropriate use of ICT to
support new ways of teaching and learning.
There have also been arguments that Home Economics is particularly suitable for
ICT usage. For example, the Home Economics Department of St. Angela’s College
(2010) emphasised that active learning methodologies used in the delivery of Home
Economics curriculum, such as cooperative practical work and project based
learning, offered relevant and real world situations to apply and develop key ICT
competencies for effective communication.
A study by Hirose (2011) demonstrated that technology was used in a variety of
ways in the field of FCS, especially as the areas of study were so varied. The author
also reported that the ability to apply technology to teach higher order thinking skills
was expected of FCS teachers upon entering the field, and specific technology skills
were also expected of students taking the subject.
In another study, Lai and Lum (2012) demonstrated that students were able to master
collaboration and organisational skills through wiki-based activities during Home
Economics lessons. The authors claimed that ICT tools provide an excellent resource
for educators to create a classroom without walls, to facilitate sharing of resources,
234
communication and collaboration. They also stressed that since wikis could provide a
convenient platform for teaching Home Economics and helped to enhance students’
learning, it was therefore timely for Home Economics teachers to lead schools in
integrating ICT into teaching and learning.
The findings of this study provide evidence that the Home Economics curriculum in
Singapore has been influenced by the global movement to utilise ICT in education.
Beginning with simple television broadcasts (in the 1980s) to the current usage of
modern ICT tools, the effort to adopt ICT has especially broadened with the launch
of ‘IT Masterplan’, a key education policy initiated by the MOE, which will be
discussed in more details at the next section.
In the 1980s, specialised educational television programmes were produced by the
MOE to support the teaching and learning in schools. For example, the 1980 Home
Economics syllabus suggested using the programme ‘Stretch Your Dollar’ to teach
students the fundamentals of consumer education (MOE, 1980), while the 1985
syllabus recommended television programmes on ‘Personal hygiene’ and
‘Grooming’ to teach health habits (MOE, 1985).
The 1994 revised syllabus recommended engaging computer-related activities for
lesson delivery, such as using computer to prepare bar charts of nutritive values of
food for quick comparison, and using software programme to create simple designs
for textile items (CPD, 1994).
235
Following the launch of the first ‘IT Masterplan’ in 1997, the 1999 Home Economics
syllabus clearly specified the need for teachers to “incorporate the use of ICT in their
lessons” (CPDD, 1998), while the 2002 syllabus included a section with suggestions
to help teachers infuse ICT in the different content of the syllabus, such as “create a
webpage with information on how to manage a diet-related disease” (CPDD, 2001).
Subsequently, numerous digitalised resources were produced by the CPDD and other
private companies to complement the implementation of the 2008 and 2014 syllabus.
These resources included, for example, videos on learning culinary skills and
conducting food science experiments, and customised computer games in the areas
of nutrition and financial literacy. Moreover, the project component in the 2014
syllabus required students to utilise ICT for their research and in collaborating with
their classmates to complete the assignment.
National objectives and government policies
Singapore is a small country with limited natural resources, so in seeking to achieve
national objectives the government has had to rely considerably on its human
resource. As education harnesses a significant portion of the population, it has been
very important to this work. Government policy in Singapore is typically expressed
through the MOE initiatives. There are seven key initiatives that have influenced the
development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. These are: the New
Education System; ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’; ‘IT Masterplan’; ‘National
Education’; ‘Innovation and Enterprise’; ‘Teach Less, Learn More’; and the
‘Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes’.
236
New Education System
In 1979, the New Education System (NES) was introduced. According to Ho and
Gopinathan (1999), the NES encompassed the provision of ability-based streaming
and changes to the school curriculum to meet the differentiated needs of the students.
The NES was implemented after a critical review of the education system in 1978 by
a high-ranking reviewing committee involving the former Deputy Prime Minister,
Dr. Goh Keng Swee. The review led to the publication of the Report on the Ministry
of Education, and overhauled the education system completely.
The report (Goh, 1979) recommended a method of streaming pupils based on their
academic ability, primarily in languages and mathematics. Pupils were to be
streamed into different courses of study determined by a series of tests, examinations
and teachers’ reports. The report also specified that streaming would “provide an
opportunity for less capable pupils to develop at a pace slower than for the more
capable students” and would “allow a child every opportunity to go as far as he can”
(cited in Goh, 1979).
At the secondary level, the implementation of NES led to the creation of three
different courses, namely the Special course, Express course and Normal course, to
allow students to progress at a pace more suited to their abilities. Furthermore,
another fine-tuning exercise of the education system took place in 1991 and created
the Normal (Technical) course, to provide a more technically-oriented basic
secondary education for academically less-inclined students (Ho & Gopinathan,
1999).
237
The findings of this study show that following the implementation of the NES, the
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore was revised to meet the differentiated
needs of the students in the different courses. In 1980, a new Home Economics
syllabus was issued in respond to the implementation of the NES and changing
societal needs. The 1980 syllabus aimed to provide learning experiences for the
young people “to realise their potential for effective living within their family, school
and community” (MOE, 1980). The syllabus highlighted that teachers should take
into “the varying abilities, interests, cultures and background experiences of the
students” when planning the programme, however the syllabus guide only provided a
generic framework for all the courses.
In 1985, a revised Home Economics syllabus was implemented, which specifically
indicated that “differentiated schemes must be planned for Normal and Express
Courses, with the appropriate instructional objectives” (MOE, 1985). The 1985
syllabus guide included differentiated framework for the Normal and Express
courses, and also set out differences in the assessment weighting between the two
courses. Moreover, teachers were advised to keep topics covered similar between the
different courses, and add more depth in the theory and include one or two variations
on the basic recipe in the practical session for the Express students (MOE, 1985).
The 1994 syllabus continued to emphasise the need to plan differentiated schemes of
work for the different courses, and further included a recommended curriculum time
for the different courses, and information on how to generate a differentiated written
examination paper (CPD, 1994). The 1999 syllabus laid out the topics to be covered
for the different courses, for example, the topic on food and culture catered only to
238
the Express course, while the topic on nutritional needs for the elderly was to be
taught to both the Express and Normal (Academic) courses (CPDD, 1998).
In 2002, the revised syllabus reiterated that teachers should adjust the depth and
breadth of their lessons to meet the needs and abilities of their pupils (CPDD, 2001).
Specifically, the 2002 syllabus highlighted that teachers should ensure they achieved
differentiation in the coursework component by setting different tasks and outcomes
for the different courses. Format of the coursework and detailed rubrics for assessing
the coursework for the different courses were provided in the syllabus guide to help
teachers carry out this component more efficiently.
The 2008 syllabus reinforced the engagement of differentiated instruction to meet the
diverse range of abilities, needs and interests in students, through the following
areas: content - concepts differentiation for students of different abilities; process –
modification of activities to meet students’ needs; and products – completed product
to depend on students’ abilities and skill level (CPDD, 2007).
In 2014, the new FCE syllabus continued to provide guidelines on differentiation in
the Core Areas of Study and Elective Modules for the different courses. For example,
more curriculum time and assessment weighting was allocated to the Elective
Modules for the Normal courses to better enable students to explore and apply their
learning (CPDD, 2014).
According to Tan and Gopinathan (2000), government statements made it clear that
the three educational policies of ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’, ‘IT
239
Masterplan’ and ‘National Education’ were crucial to national efforts to remain
economically competitive and for the transition to a knowledge economy. These
policies were consecutively launched in 1997.
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation
‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’ focussed on developing all students into active
learners with critical thinking skills, and on developing a creative and critical
thinking culture within schools. This policy was launched by the former Prime
Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, in June 1997.
According to the MOE (2012b), this policy aimed to develop a nation of thinking and
committed citizens, capable of making good decisions to keep Singapore vibrant and
successful, and meeting the challenges of the future. The key strategies for this
policy involved the explicit teaching of critical and creative thinking skills, the
reduction of subject content, and the revision of assessment modes.
IT Masterplan
The ‘IT Masterplan’ proposed to integrate ICT into the “thinking curriculum” to
motivate students to be creative and independent. This policy was launched by the
then Minister of Education, Mr Teo Chee Hean, in April 1997, and was an earnest
attempt by the MOE to incorporate ICT in teaching and learning in every Singapore
school (Goh & Gopinathan, 2008).
Three phases of the Masterplans have been carried out since the launch: Masterplan 1
(1997-2002) laid a strong foundation for schools to harness ICT, particularly in the
240
provision of basic ICT infrastructure and in equipping teachers with a basic level of
ICT integration competency; Masterplan 2 (2003-2008) strived for an effective and
pervasive use of ICT through a systematic and holistic approach by integrating all
key components in the education system – curriculum, assessment, pedagogy,
professional training and culture; and Masterplan 3 (2009-2014) sought to strengthen
integration of ICT into curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, to improve the sharing
of best practices and successful innovations, and to enhance ICT provisions in
schools (MOE, 2008).
National Education
The ‘National Education’ programme sought to ensure that students developed a
sense of emotional belonging and commitment to the community and nation, and
were able to make decisions for their future with conviction and realism. This policy
was launched by the then Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsieh Loong, in May
1997, and was an integral part of the government’s strategies in education to prepare
for the future. The MOE (1997) maintained that the National Education programme
should be a part of a holistic education and infused across the formal and informal
curricula in schools. The emphasis was on active participation and experiential
learning, so that students would regard National Education as an integral and
intrinsic part of school life.
Findings of this study show that in response to the implementations of the three
educational policies identified above, the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
was revised to embrace the intentions of these policies. The introduction of these
policies led to a major content reduction exercise for all curricula, in recognition of
241
the extra time needed to incorporate these programmes into the curriculum. Hence in
1999, a transitional Home Economics syllabus with reduced content was issued. This
served as an interim measure because a fully revised syllabus could only be ready by
2001, due to an intensive review procedure (CPDD, 1998). The 1999 Home
Economics syllabus saw the complete removal of the component on Children at Play,
and freed up 15% of the subject curriculum time to infuse thinking skills, incorporate
the use of ICT, and deliver the National Education ideas in the lessons.
As identified in Chapter Five, the fully revised syllabus launched in 2002 emphasised
that teachers should incorporate all the following elements in their schemes of work:
National Education, ICT, thinking skills, coursework skills and basic experimental
methodology involving investigation skills (CPDD, 2001). According to the CPDD
(2001), the 2002 syllabus intended to provide students with the knowledge and skills
to help them “think critically”, and to “examine issues that affect the community”.
The 2002 syllabus also embraced the method of ‘thematic approach’ in lesson
planning, whereby related topics were introduced around a central theme. This
approach allowed for linkages of different components and made learning more
meaningful by placing learning in a context (CPDD, 2004).
The successive 2008 and 2014 revised syllabi continued to advocate the approach of
inquiry-based learning, engaging students through investigative activities to develop
their thinking, research and communication skills in an authentic learning context.
242
A further two major educational policies, namely ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ and
‘Teach Less, Learn More’, launched in 2003 and 2004, respectively, exerted an
influence on the design of the 2008 Home Economics syllabus in Singapore.
Innovation and Enterprise
‘Innovation and Enterprise’ was launched by the then Acting Minister for Education,
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, at a MOE work plan seminar in 2003. This policy
was intended to nurture in students the spirit to innovate and try new ideas without
undue fear of failure, to meet the challenges of intense global competition (Tharman,
2004). The key strategies for this programme encouraged teachers to engage new and
unexplored pedagogical practices, and to design effective innovative and
entrepreneurial lessons for quality learning in the classrooms.
Teach Less, Learn More
‘Teach Less, Learn More’ was launched by the Prime Minster, Mr Lee Hsien Loong,
during his inaugural National Day Rally Speech in 2004. This policy focussed on the
fundamentals of effective teaching, by engaging innovative instructional approaches
to ensure students learn with understanding, while de-emphasising the role and
importance of rote learning and repetitive tests (Tharman, 2005). The key strategy of
this programme was to transform the focus of learning from quantity to quality,
consequently, schools need to innovate in curriculum (what to teach), pedagogy (how
to teach) and assessment (how much students have learnt) to promote more engaged
learning.
243
As described in Chapter Five, the findings of this study show that the 2008 Home
Economics syllabus was designed to infuse the objectives of the two policies
discussed above. Foremost, the component of Textiles and Clothing was removed,
and the syllabus was reorganised into two main areas of study, namely Food Studies
and Consumer Studies (CPDD, 2007). As a result, this reduction in content created a
‘white space’, which was space freed up in the curriculum time for teachers to
implement modules they developed.
This white space gave teachers room to experiment using different pedagogical
approaches and assessment modes, to promote engaged learning as well as to meet
the needs of students. According to the CPDD (2007), the white space could be used
in the following areas: experimenting with different pedagogical approaches in the
core area to meet the different learning styles and needs of the students; and creating
modules of interest to extend students’ learning, such as development of a food
product to promote the spirit of innovation and creativity.
The 2008 syllabus also encouraged employing a variety of teaching approaches,
including problem-based learning, inquiry-based learning and differentiated
instruction, to help to enhance engaged learning in the classroom (CPDD, 2007).
Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes
The ‘Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes’ was
introduced in 2010. It has influenced the design of the 2014 Home Economics
curriculum in Singapore. This framework is used to enhance the development of the
244
21st Century competencies in the students, to help them thrive in a fast-changing
world.
According to the MOE (2010a), students need to possess life-ready competencies
like creativity, innovation, cross-cultural understanding and resilience so that they
are in a better position to take advantage of opportunities in a globalised world.
Essentially, the development of the 21st Century competencies will help students to
embrace the Desired Outcomes of Education, attributes that educators aspire for
every Singaporean to possess upon the completion of their formal education (MOE,
2010a). These attributes include being a confident person, a self-directed learner, an
active contributor and a concerned citizen.
The findings of this study show that the 2014 FCE syllabus was designed to
incorporate the intentions of the framework cited above. The CPDD (2014)
maintained that “the development of 21st Century competencies is inherent in the
content, learning process and assessment tasks of the syllabus”. Through the
engagement of effective teaching, such as inquiry-based learning, students will be
able to develop these competencies during the FCE lessons (CPDD, 2014).
The 2014 syllabus guide also provided the link between some learning outcomes in
the FCE syllabus and the corresponding 21st Century competencies. For example, in
discussing social issues affecting the health and wellbeing of families and
community, students would develop competencies in civic literacy, global awareness
and cross cultural skills (CPDD, 2014).
245
The next section will focus on the achievements and challenges of the contemporary
Home Economics curriculum, drawing on the findings from the study interviews
with teachers implementing the 2014 syllabus in schools.
Achievements and Challenges of the Contemporary Home Economics
Curriculum in Singapore
Preparing the 2014 FCE syllabus
An extensive syllabus review from 2010 to 2011 was undertaken before the proposal
for the 2014 syllabus was approved in 2011 (CPDD, 2013). The aim of the review
was to ensure that the new syllabus was in alignment with the global trends in Home
Economics education, and incorporated the objectives of current MOE policies.
The review process involved global and local scans to analyse global trends and the
MOE initiatives, consultations with local tertiary institutions and agencies, and
conducting feedback group discussions with representatives from the schools.
Consultation and feedback sessions further helped to ensure relevancy and currency
of syllabus content, alignment to courses offered at tertiary institutions, and
applicability of the syllabus content and skills for future employment (CPDD, 2013).
Key outcomes of the review were as follows:
‘Home Economics’ was refashioned as ‘Food and Consumer Education’, to provide
better reflection and alignment to the content coverage, and to grant the subject a
more global outlook (CPDD, 2013).
246
The coursework component was replaced by a project assignment based on the
Elective Modules. The Elective Modules allowed students to build upon the
knowledge from the Core Areas of Study, extend their learning in related topics
according to their interest, and display the application of thinking skills when
developing the task.
The 2014 syllabus infused the learning of 21st Century skills, with respect to the
framework of 21st Century Competencies. There was a re-commitment to an
experiential syllabus design and to encouraging and enabling inquiry-based learning.
Achievements of the contemporary Home Economics curriculum
This study identified a number of strengths developing to become characteristic of
Home Economics curriculum design over time. The pattern continued with the 2014
syllabus. It exhibited responsiveness to national needs and educational
advancements; flexibility and innovation; and (further) expansion of subject content.
These achievements in the syllabus are discussed below.
Flexible and innovative
A recurring comment from interview participants in this study was that the 2014
syllabus encouraged customisation according to needs. That is, it was sufficiently
flexible and sufficiently committed to relevant experiential learning that it
encouraged innovative teaching/learning practices. For example, teachers at one
school reported that they utilised the flexibility in the syllabus to provide students
with the option of choosing a specific skill-based module, such as cake-making or
pastry-making, based on their interest and ability.
247
Syllabus innovations, such as the encouragement for teaching/learning about the role
of food in culture, were identified as valuable by teachers in the study. Teachers in
one school, for example, responded enthusiastically to this innovation, using the
special herbs and spices from the school garden to teach students the cooking of
‘Peranakan’ dishes, in order to reinforce their understanding and appreciation of the
school’s unique cultural background.
Teachers also found the introduction of the Elective Modules in the 2014 syllabus to
be a welcome innovation. They maintained that the new modules enabled students to
embark on projects that broadened their thinking and learning, and contributed to the
community with FCE knowledge and skills. A positive example they offered was of
a module project on “planning a nutritious menu for an elderly day care centre”.
Teachers were also pleased that the syllabus gave schools the option to choose a
module that appealed most to their students’ interest and passion. Teachers saw this
flexible approach as helping to enthuse students in the learning of the subject.
Participants from the teachers’ interviews also shared a common understanding that
the Elective Modules supported the development of process skills. They believed that
acquiring these process skills benefited students in their extended education
experience, for example, in carrying out research projects at the tertiary level, and
helping them to make wise decision, and improve on performance in their daily
encounters.
248
Enshrined in the 2014 syllabus is a commitment to giving teachers the latitude and
the tools to provide students with meaningful learning experiences. This is an
approach to syllabus design that wins support in the literature on Home Economics
curriculum design. For example, the CDC of Hong Kong (2015) maintained that the
learning tasks and activities designed for Home Economics curriculum should be
thought-provoking and meaningful to students, with the objective to motivate them,
to consolidate or enhance their understanding and their ability to put theory into
practice.
Expansion in subject knowledge and functions
This study found that teachers saw the key priority in the 2014 syllabus as the
teaching (and learning) of ‘life skills’, skills critical for addressing the challenges of
life in contemporary society. They believed, for example, that helping students
developed nutrition knowledge and culinary skills could serve as a preventive
measure against obesity and other health problems associated with an affluent
society. They also believed that financial literacy knowledge and budget managing
skills were vital to address the ‘surge’ in consumerism.
Furthermore, teachers valued what they viewed as the practicality of the 2014
syllabus, maintaining it fostered the application of FCE knowledge and skills in the
‘real’ world. They approved, for example, that students (typically with full-time
working parents) could use the culinary skills targeted in the syllabus to prepare their
own meals. Teachers also approved of syllabus activities such as the ‘supermarket
tour’ and the ‘healthy cooking competition’ that enabled students to put their
knowledge to good ‘practical’ use.
249
Essentially, teachers believed that the 2014 syllabus helpfully addressed new
lifestyles and consumer trends, and encompassed essential knowledge, skills and
attitudes to survive in the 21st Century. From their viewpoint then, there was a
successful expansion in subject knowledge and functions in the 2014 syllabus.
The need for Home Economics to deliver on a range of skills required for life in a
consumerist society, a commitment of the 2014 syllabus identified and approved by
teachers in this study, is a recurring theme in the literature. For example, according to
the IFHE (2016), Home Economics literacy is the multidisciplinary expression of
several literacies, including food literacy, health literacy, financial literacy, consumer
literacy and environmental literacy. As a further example, Ma and Pendergast (2011)
emphasised that an effective Home Economics curriculum should incorporate these
three tenets: technical practice (skills to cope with material, day-to-day needs daily),
interpretative practice (ability to understand, adapt to and conform to change), and
emancipator practice (understanding power and ethics and the achievement of
potential).
Supportive of national interests and special needs
Teachers saw the focus on teaching and learning ‘life skills’ in the 2014 syllabus as a
responsiveness not only to the rise of consumerism, but also to national and
community needs. This discussion focuses on this particular function or ‘strength’ of
the syllabus.
250
The 2014 syllabus has been able to support the interests and needs of Singapore
through the routine syllabus review procedure undertaken by the MOE and described
earlier in the chapter. According to Yip et al. (1997), syllabus review aimed to
respond to such matters as the shifting ideologies of political leaders; and the needs
of the nation and community.
The focus this study identified in the 2014 syllabus, that of developing skills and
attitude necessary for the wellbeing of nation and community, appears to correlate
with social efficiency ideology. According to Schiro (2013), the focus of social
efficiency ideology was to train students in the skills which they would require in the
workplace and at home to live productive lives, with the objective of meeting the
needs of society efficiently.
As discussed earlier, interview respondents understood the aims of the 2014 syllabus
in the development of skills to manage the challenges and conditions of living in
contemporary Singapore. In order to infuse this learning of the 21st Century
competencies with regard to civic literacy, students were informed about national
issues and encouraged to take pride in being Singaporean and contribute actively to
the community (CPDD, 2014).
For example, one compelling national issue has been the urgency to deal with rising
costs and household debt in the country. It was observed before the launch of the
2014 syllabus that the new syllabus placed greater emphasis on financial education,
and on teaching students about the fundamentals of money management (The Straits
Times online, 2013 July 16). The teaching of financial literacy was also part of the
251
national ‘MoneySense’ programme, which aimed to address various financial issues
faced at different points in a person’s life (The Sunday Times, 2013 October 20,
p.21).
Responsive to international educational practices and pedagogy
Orthodoxies in international education practices and pedagogy include inquiry-based
learning, the utilisation of ICT and the development of 21st Century skills. In the
literature, Home Economics is presented as a necessary and logical arena for the
development of these skills and these teaching/learning activities. Indeed, more than
two decades ago, Shommo (1995) argued that the trend towards a critical thinking
approach in Home Economics was inevitable because Home Economics was an
integrative discipline that supported the use of critical thinking and a problem-
solving perspective. FCS has been treated similarly. Mimbs (2005) for example,
argued that a critical-thinking, problem-based curricular approach was the correct
focus for teaching FCS.
Piscopo and Mugliett (2012) also affirmed active learning in Home Economics was
feasible through engaging problem-solving and decision making approaches. Studies
by the IFHE (2009), Hirose (2011), and Lai and Lum (2012) have demonstrated the
importance of engaging ICT to support the teaching and learning of Home
Economics.
Teacher responses in this study testify that the 2014 syllabus has been able to
incorporate key developments in international educational practices and pedagogy, in
pursuit of the desired outcomes of education defined in the Singapore system.
252
Teachers clearly registered the 2014 syllabus as embracing a 21st Century
competencies framework, through promoting practices of inquiry-based learning and
utilisation of ICT, as the core elements of the pedagogical approach.
They mentioned aspects of the syllabus including requirements that students be able
to ‘assess options and think out of the box’. They mentioned the syllabus push for
teaching/learning to develop information and communication skills, with the focus
on knowing how to extract relevant and useful information. As another example,
participants reflected that the project in the Elective Modules required students to
apply different process skills which were specifically identified as skills associated
with the inquiry-based learning model. In respect to ICT, teachers particularly
mentioned that the syllabus advised and encouraged ‘many innovations’ including
the use of ‘flipped classroom’ pedagogy to reinforce an approach of self-directed and
collaborative learning.
Challenges of the contemporary Home Economics curriculum
As explained, the 2014 syllabus exhibited many of the strengths reflective of the
general history of Home Economics curriculum design in Singapore. However,
through the interviews, this study has also identified important challenges for
teachers delivering the syllabus. The import of these challenges are discussed below.
Need for more curriculum time and better resources
Teachers in the study shared a common view that curriculum hours were insufficient
for content delivery, the syllabus was ‘overloaded’ and resources were too limited for
efficient conduct of the practical sessions.
253
To elaborate on these issues, a particular issue for participants was the ‘insufficiency’
of designated curriculum hours to complete the many components in the 2014
syllabus, including theoretical knowledge, practical lessons and project work.
Another issue was the extensive scope with regard to the theoretical content of the
syllabus, which most participants believed was less interesting to the students as
compared to the practical cooking lessons. One more issue shared by the participants
was the need to allocate a continuous block of at least one and a half hour of teaching
time to conduct the cooking lessons.
The literature evidences that these kinds of issues are common to Home Economics
teachers worldwide. For example, a study by the Home Economics Institute of
Australia (HEIA, 2002) highlighted issues regarding the support needed by Home
Economics teachers to operate good programmes, which included sufficient time
allocation for Home Economics lessons, adequate facilities to meet the demands of
the curriculum, and appropriate support of teacher-aides. As a further example,
Arnett (2012) reported that problems encountered by FCS teachers involved the areas
of inadequate and out-of-date equipment, insufficient budget and funding, and not
enough curriculum time for teaching.
In line with Arnett’s and the HEIA’s findings, teachers in this study shared the need
for adequate and better resources to cope with the demands of the syllabus,
particularly in conducting the practical sessions. Participants highlighted the
resourcing areas which they felt were most critical, including old and worn
equipment and appliances in the school kitchens that needed to be replaced or
254
upgraded, and of the need for a kitchen aide to assist teachers in the preparations for
cooking lessons.
Unmet Professional Development needs
A significant finding of this study was that teachers felt they did not have the
necessary competencies to deliver the syllabus as effectively as they wished. To
reiterate, teachers, especially newer teachers, believed there were ‘inadequacies’ in
the teachers’ training programme. Specifically, participants reflected that they had
not been sufficiently trained for teaching students the proper skills and procedure to
complete the FCE project. They also saw an inadequacy of training as a reason for
their lack of confidence to conduct practical lessons on their own. Moreover, they
maintained that specific content taught in the training programme, such as ‘clothing
and textile’, was not relevant to the 2014 syllabus.
Participants also expressed issue about mentoring and guidance for new teachers
posted to schools. For example, beginning teachers claimed there were no existing
experienced Home Economics teachers in their posted schools, and as a result they
had to struggle with planning and implementing the programme on their own.
Current MOE policy on teacher posting does not specify that new teachers must be
posted to schools with existing experienced teachers teaching the same subject.
However, participants believed that it was crucial to have existing experience
teachers to support and guide new teachers in their posted schools.
Teachers also expressed issue regarding the limitations of professional sharing. Their
common view was that insufficient professional sharing sessions were being
255
organised for Home Economics teachers to share and learn good teaching practices
from one another and to keep up with the latest developments in subject knowledge
and teaching pedagogy.
Teachers (especially newer teachers) shared issue over the lack of an indicator to
gauge the proficiency level of teachers in teaching the subject. They felt that this was
especially critical for beginning teachers posted to schools without existing
experienced teachers to guide them. Some participants also indicated the need to
gauge the progress of the subject in schools, in order to observe any areas for
improvement. With the constant revision of the curriculum and innovations in
teaching pedagogy, they believed it was necessary to maintain the quality of teaching
through benchmarking. In sum, the study found that teachers’ professional needs
were not being fully met, to the detriment of teaching delivery.
In respect to these issues, the study by HEIA (2002) suggested that the competency
of beginning teachers could be boosted by placing them in schools where there was
at least one other teacher with the subject area expertise to provide mentorship and
guidance. A study by Dewhurst and Pendergast (2008) recommended engaging
Home Economics teachers in building professional learning communities because
their involvement and perceptions were crucial in implementing any education
policy. In addition, Arnett (2012) reported on the need for better teacher education
programmes and continuous professional development to address teachers’ limited
competency, to provide the benefits of guidance from experienced teachers to
support beginning FCS teachers, and the benefits of networking with other FCS
teachers to share ideas and to seek or provide advice.
256
Subject misconceptions and low status
Participants generally believed the nature of Home Economics was not well
understood in the community and in Singapore’s schools. They further believed
misconceptions of the subject created a low status for Home Economics in
Singapore. Teachers complained the subject was perceived as being entirely
concerned with training students in domestic tasks, rather than knowledge in
nutrition, food science and consumer education. Teachers believed this ‘false’ but
widespread view of Home Economics caused the subject to suffer a low status in
Singapore schools and in the wider society. They felt the subject was viewed as less
important than most others in the curriculum and received inadequate support from
school management.
The teachers’ arguments may well be valid. There is certainly evidence of teachers
encountering these issues in the literature. For example, a study by Arnett (2012)
which identified and categorised a list of problems encountered by FCS teachers
during their first year of teaching found that FCS was not taken seriously or valued
by staff in schools.
The Development of the Home Economics Curriculum in Singapore
The analysis in the above two sections reveals that the development of the Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore generally can be characterised as robust,
dynamic and progressive. The first section evidences that over its history, the
Singapore Home Economics curriculum has been persistently responsive to key
257
global trends in education and adept at addressing national goals and needs.
Discussion in the second section generally supports the same conclusions in relation
to the 2014 syllabus, the latest at the time of writing.
To reiterate, the main strengths in curriculum design and implementation that have
evolved include the following: gender equity initiatives including shared
responsibility; addressing the need for aptitude in the broader social and
economic environment; engendering skills and knowledge to address the nation’s
interests and needs; and responding rapidly to and embracing global trends in
educational practices and pedagogy.
However, the study also found there are some key challenges for teachers dealing
with the 2014 syllabus. The study found teachers believed that more curriculum time
and better resources were required for effective teaching/learning. The study also
revealed unmet professional development needs. The study also found teachers felt
hampered by what they perceived as common ‘misconceptions’ of their subject and
by the corresponding low status it held among school subjects. Recommendations to
resolve these issues will be provided in the next chapter.
258
Conclusion
This chapter has presented the influences on the development of the Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore, as well as the achievements and challenges of
the contemporary Home Economics curriculum. The discussion was positioned on
the analytic findings relevant to the historical inquiry, and perspectives of curriculum
developers, teachers and other stakeholders involved in the events.
The two distinct influences on the curriculum comprised of global trends in Home
Economics education, and national objectives and government policies. In the light
of the findings, it can be suggested that the curriculum transformation has largely
been significant and positive, achieving many areas of success. However, study also
identified a number of challenges for teachers implementing the 2014 Syllabus.
A summary of the discussion, in relation to the influences, achievements, and
challenges of the curriculum transformation, is displayed in Figure 8.
The next chapter, Chapter Eight, will summarise the study and provide
recommendation to address the challenges identified and discussed in Chapters Six
and Seven.
259
Influences on the development of the Home Economics curriculum
Achievements of the 2014 Challenges of the 2014 Home Economics curriculum Home Economics curriculum
Figure 8. Summary of the influences, achievements and challenges of the Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore
Global trends in Home Economics education
Influence of gender equity
Need for flexible and transferable skills
Responding to consumerism
Utilisation of ICT
National objectives and government policies
New Education
Thinking Schools, Learning Nation
IT Masterplan
National Education
Innovation and Enterprise
Teach Less, Learn More
Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes
Flexible and innovative
Expansion in subject knowledge and functions
Supportive of national interests and special needs
Responsive to international educational practices and pedagogy
Perceived need for more curriculum time and better resources
Perceived unmet Professional Development needs
Perceived subject misconceptions and low status
260
CHAPTER EIGHT
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter concludes the thesis in four main sections. The first section provides an
overview of the study to reiterate the research aims and rationale, as well as outline
the research methodology. The second section presents a summary of the findings, in
relation to the history and development of the Home Economics curriculum, and
current issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers in teaching the subject. The
third section details recommendations to address the challenges identified in this
research, particularly through the interviews with teachers implementing the 2104
syllabus. The fourth section summarises the achievements of this study and discusses
the implications for further research.
Overview of the Study
This study explored the history of the secondary school Home Economics curriculum
in Singapore and examined the issues and concerns of teachers delivering the 2014
curriculum. Prior to this study, these matters had not been comprehensively
investigated or documented. There were various arguments for generating a (this)
history of the curriculum. These included the need to understand the goals and
direction of the curriculum over time, the nature and extent of change and the
catalysts for curriculum transformation. The basic belief informing this study was
that this information was vital to future curriculum design and delivery, that it was
important to understand not only the achievements and direction of the curriculum,
but also what drove change. It was reasoned that identifying teacher issues and
261
concerns in curriculum implementation was a necessary complement to the
generation of the history for the over-arching purpose of contributing knowledge to
assist in the enhancement of future curriculum design and delivery.
The three specific research aims of the study were:
1. To investigate the history of the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from Singapore’s independence in 1965 to 2008.
2. To investigate developments in the secondary school Home Economics
curriculum from 2008 to 2014.
3. To investigate the issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers
regarding the teaching of Home Economics in three different types of
secondary schools in Singapore, namely, mainstream schools, autonomous
schools and independent schools.
Predominately, the first main aim of this study was to develop a history of the
purpose and practice of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore, from
Independence to the present. The second major aim was to identify the implications
of the findings for present and future policy, curriculum, practice and research.
Three research questions were developed to closely reflect and address the three
study aims. The study was then divided into two stages, history first and interviews
with contemporary practitioners second. An historical research approach was
employed to address the first two questions pertaining to the history of the
curriculum to 2014. This approach involved collecting, describing and analysing data
in a range of public and official documents to understand the historical background
262
and developments of Home Economics in Singapore to the emergence of the 2014
curriculum. To supplement the existing documentary data, oral histories were
gathered from curriculum developers and former teachers.
The third question was addressed through a qualitative research design, an
interpretivist approach. One-to-one and focus group interviews were undertaken with
beginning and experienced Home Economics teachers from the different types of
secondary schools in order to develop understandings of their issues and concerns in
curriculum delivery.
Documentary data, in the form of MOE curriculum frameworks and Home
Economics syllabus guidelines, reports and statements published by the MOE and
other professional organisations, papers presented at conferences, and newspaper
articles, were gathered.
Documentary data was analysed through content analysis, while the interview
transcripts were analysed using the Miles and Huberman Framework for Qualitative
Data Analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994).
Summary of Findings
History and development of the Home Economics curriculum
The findings pertaining to the first and second research questions testified to
evolutionary development. Essentially, the curriculum has moved from narrow
purpose and skill set towards broader goals and arguably an increasingly enlightened
263
view. Its mission has been revised and refined and its target client group expanded
and re-imagined. This study has found that a major reason for the progress made with
curriculum design has been responsiveness to international educational developments
and Singapore’s social, economic, educational and political needs. Key
developments in the history of the curriculum are identified below.
Key development 1
A shift in emphasis from preparing girls for basic domestic duties to educating girls
and boys to be wise consumers. In 1965, the syllabus was gender-specific and
focussed on basic household and motherhood activities. But in 1994 Home
Economics was made a compulsory subject for all lower secondary girls and boys,
and was directed towards equipping students with knowledge and skills associated
less with domesticity and more with what could broadly be described as ‘adult life’.
At the time of this study, emphasis was on empowering students to be health-
conscious and discerning consumers, enabling them to better manage their lives.
Key development 2
Regular revisions of the syllabus to incorporate the implementation of new
educational initiatives. Beginning in 1980, the syllabus was revised due to the launch
of the New Education System, which featured ability-based streaming. Between
1999 and 2008, three revised syllabi were implemented to incorporate the
educational initiatives on ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’, ‘Information
Technology Masterplan’ and ‘National Education’, ‘Innovation and Enterprise’ and
‘Teach Less, Learn More’. At the time of this study, the 2014 syllabus was designed
264
to infuse the latest initiative of the ‘Framework for 21st Century Competencies and
Student Outcomes’.
Key development 3
A shift in focus from training of practical skills to inquiry-based learning and
inculcation of values, as curriculum design evolved from technical to a critical
science approach. The syllabus in 1965 focussed mainly on the learning of
manipulative skills and practical application. However from 1980s onwards the
scope of the subject was expanded to include management of personal and family
resources, and inculcation of values and attitudes. The 2014 syllabus focussed on
inquiry-based learning, intending to train pupils to become creative and resourceful
problem-solvers.
Key development 4
Streamlining of subject content to maintain relevancy with changing lifestyle and
social needs. The 1965 syllabus included five main areas of study which focussed on
different domestic elements to develop manipulative skills. Over time, the subject
content underwent a series of consolidation and re-organisation, leading to various
revised syllabi and a reduction in the areas of study. The 2014 syllabus comprised the
core areas of food studies and consumer studies, as knowledge in food and cookery is
crucial regardless of any changes in society and time period, while knowledge in
consumer education is useful due to the growth of consumerism in modern society.
265
Key development 5
Revision of subject identity to signify new directions in the curriculum and to fit in
with global trends. In 1970 ‘Domestic Science’ was renamed as ‘Home Economics’
to reflect the expanding roles of women in executing consumerism skills to manage
household resources. Then in 2014 the subject was renamed as ‘Food and Consumer
Education’ to provide better alignment to changes in the subject content, and to
project a more professional image in respect to the branding of the subject.
Current issues and concerns of Home Economics teachers
Seven thematic areas emerged from the analysis of teacher interview data and
documents. These are summarised below.
Thematic area 1: Aims and objectives of the curriculum
Teachers viewed the teaching of life skills as the curriculum imperative, reasoning
life skills were crucial to address the modern societal challenges and pressures. A
related theme was the value placed on teaching process skills, because of the
understanding that such skills facilitated decision making and (social) performance.
Thematic area 2: Structure and content of the syllabus
Teachers believed there were too many components to deliver in an ‘overloaded’
syllabus, including theory, practical lessons and project work. An associated theme
was that teachers deemed the ‘excessive’ scope in theoretical content reduced student
interest in the subject and shortened the curriculum time available for practical
lessons. A third related theme was the questionable relevancy of specific content, as
teachers argued that certain topics were difficult and inappropriate for students of a
266
‘young’ age. A fourth associated theme was ‘inadequacy’ of resources to conduct the
practical lessons. A fifth theme was that teachers (from independent schools) shared
the flexibility to ‘customise’ the syllabus according to their schools’ needs.
Thematic area 3: Delivery of lessons
An emergent theme was ‘insufficiency’ of assigned curriculum time to deliver the
complete syllabus. A second related theme was the need to benchmark the quality of
teaching to gauge proficiency levels and progress of the subject in schools. A third
emergent theme was the sharing of useful strategies to enhance lesson delivery, for
example, through remedial lessons and using Information Technology.
Thematic area 4: Assessment of learning
An emergent theme was ‘deviations’ in the extent/range of the assessment format
practiced in the different types of schools. Another associated theme was setting
‘appropriate’ expectations in the assessment of student learning, which teachers
commented must be realistic and workable.
Thematic area 5: Teachers’ competency and training
An emergent theme was ‘inadequacies’ in the teachers’ training programme which
prepared new teachers for their role. A related theme was the need for better
guidance and mentoring for new teachers posted to schools.
267
Thematic area 6: Organisational communication practices
An emergent theme was the need to have more professional sharing among teachers
of different schools. A related theme was the need to improve communication and
coordination between relevant organisations, such as the MOE and the schools.
Thematic area 7: Status and perception of subject Home Economics
The key emergent themes were the need to raise the status of Home Economics in
schools and the community, as well as the need to eliminate lingering
misconceptions that Home Economics was ‘domestic training’.
Recommendations
In respect to the challenges identified in the analytical findings of this study,
recommendations for curriculum, practice and policy to address these issues are as
follows.
Recommendation 1
Education authorities and school managements to provide better support to facilitate
implementation of the Home Economics curriculum.
This study found that teachers felt overwhelmed to deliver an ‘overloaded’ syllabus
within limited curriculum hours and with restricted resources. Hence relevant
authorities need to look at better support for the Home Economics teachers to help
them manage the increasing demands in teaching the subject. In view of providing
better support for teachers, the study by Arnett (2012) had identified similar issues
encountered by FCS teachers in America. The author recommended proper
268
communication to school administrators to inform about problems found, and
strategising of a plan of action to resolve these issues.
Basically, consideration could be given to adjusting the assigned lesson hours to
meet the demand of a broadening curriculum. As such, special official memoranda
concerning the allocation of FCE curriculum time could be issued by the CPDD and
circulated to the schools, on top of the “recommended” hours defined in the syllabus
document. The memoranda could clarify the need for sufficient curriculum hours to
complete the Elective Modules project, and indicate the necessity to assign a
continuous block of at least one and a half hour of teaching time for the practical
session. Fuller explanations in the policy text would ease the planning of a more
effective timetable for teachers to implement the curriculum.
Furthermore, the approach to budget allocation may be re-visited to provide adequate
resources for the delivery of the practical lessons. The School Financial Instruction
Manual (MOE, 2016b) specified that school leaders will be given maximum
flexibility to manage their resources to ensure the smooth and efficient running of
their schools within the broad guidelines laid down by the MOE. Hence school
managements could support the funding to upgrade worn-out facilities in the school
kitchens, and to keep the equipment in good working condition. Another suggestion
is for schools to engage the service of a kitchen aide to relieve teachers of the time
needed to prepare the ingredients and equipment for the practical session, and
maintain the cleanliness of the kitchens.
269
Recommendation 2
Education authorities and teachers training institutions to look into relevant training
courses and more training opportunities for Home Economics teachers’ professional
development needs.
As the analytic findings revealed that beginning teachers were apprehensive they had
not been adequately trained to implement the curriculum, education and teachers
training authorities might review the teachers training programme to meet the actual
situation in schools. There is widespread support in the literature which validated the
value of appropriate training for Home Economics teachers in relation to their
competency. The study by Hirose (2011) demonstrated that FCS teachers equipped
with better technology skills were more confident in using technology in class. In
another study, Arnett (2012) reported that stakeholders need to ensure that teachers’
competency were being addressed within the teacher education programmes in order
to improve FCS teachers’ job satisfaction.
One recommendation to enhance teachers’ competency is to revise the training
programme concurrently whenever there is a change in the syllabus. This could
ensure that teacher training can be better aligned to meet the demand of the new
syllabus. Another suggestion is that teachers training institutions could plan and
develop more useful and relevant courses to address the specific training needs of the
teachers, such as cooking classes to enhance teachers’ culinary skills. Moreover, as
teachers also shared the issue regarding poor coordination between the education
authorities and training institutions, one suggestion is to enhance the communication
and collaboration between these organisations through organising regular sessions
270
for their officers to meet together to develop a truly effective teachers’ training
programme.
As expectations on teachers’ level of professional competency continue to increase,
it is also deemed necessary for non-graduate teachers to obtain a degree qualification.
According to the Education Statistics Digest 2015 (MOE, 2015b), there were a total
of 575 non-graduate education officers teaching in the secondary schools. A
suggestion is that a specific scheme be arranged to create more opportunities to help
non-graduate Home Economics teachers to pursue undergraduate studies.
The beginning teachers also expressed issue about not having any experienced Home
Economics teachers in their posted schools to provide guidance. Hence there appears
to a need to review the current school posting process. It seems it could be useful to
refine current practices so that new teachers are posted to schools with experienced
teachers in the same subject area to serve as mentors.
The analytic findings also revealed that teachers felt the professional sharing sessions
organised by the authorities were too limited. Besides focussing on local sharing
sessions, one suggestion is that the authorities could conduct learning journeys for
teachers to visit schools and institutions in countries which are recognised for their
accomplishment in the field, such as Australia and Japan. Another suggestion is that
the authorities could also sponsor teachers to attend the various international Home
Economics conferences organised by the IFHE. These overseas activities would
allow teachers to learn the best practices and successful innovations carried out in
other countries.
271
Recommendation 3
Curriculum designers to review and strengthen the structure, content, and
assessment of learning in the 2014 syllabus.
The analytic findings suggested a need to address teachers’ anxieties regarding the
structure, content, and assessment of learning in the 2014 syllabus. Teachers
reflected issues relating to too many components in the syllabus, excessive scope in
the theoretical content, questionable relevancy of specific content, and inappropriate
expectations in the assessment of learning. Therefore curriculum designers might
consider reviewing and strengthening these areas in the future syllabus.
In respect to the structure and content of the syllabus, one recommendation is to
streamline the different components, such as consolidating the practical and theory
components. For example, a sequence of cooking lessons using fruits and vegetables
as the main ingredients could incorporate teaching of theoretical content on vitamins,
minerals and dietary fibre at the same time. This approach would also allow students
to learn theory in a more interesting way. Another suggestion is that topics which
may be too complicated for young teenagers to understand could be embedded into
other related areas to make it easier to comprehend. For example, difficult concepts
in financial literacy like ‘hire purchase’ could be integrated with the topic on ‘goods
and services’, using the idea of buying a car to explain this concept of payment
through instalments.
In respect to the assessment of learning, curriculum designers might wish to consider
more discreetly variations in the students’ competency across the different academic
272
courses. As the 2014 syllabus document contained only common project samples
which applied to all the courses, one suggestion would be for the future syllabus to
include differentiated project samples directed at each individual course. These
differentiated samples could help teachers better understand the different assessment
expectations for the individual courses.
Recommendation 4
Education authorities to provide a benchmark to assist teachers to evaluate their
competency in teaching the subject.
The analytic findings revealed teachers’ worry over the lack of an indicator to gauge
their proficiency in teaching the subject. One solution to the problem might be to
introduce a set of criteria to measure teachers’ capability in implementing the
curriculum. This could be officially documented by the authorities and circulated to
the schools. The criteria may include essential proficiencies pertaining to content
knowledge, culinary skills and coursework instruction which Home Economics
teachers should possess.
This benchmarking would enable teachers to identify their current competency level
and make relevant plans for their own training needs. In addition, school leaders with
little or no knowledge about Home Economics education could also use the criteria
to assess the performance and achievement of the Home Economics teachers with
impartiality during their annual work performance review.
273
Recommendation 5
Schools and relevant stakeholders to seek to rectify misconceptions of the subject
Home Economics and improve its status in the community.
The analytic findings showed that teachers believed the nature of Home Economics
was not well understood in schools and the community. Home Economics was still,
in the minds of many, essentially training for domestic life. Teachers believed
therefore that their subject was de-valued. This had implications for the subject, for
teacher morale and for teaching/learning.
Studies suggest that Home Economics teachers and relevant stakeholders must be
proactive in educating and advocating for the profession within the school and
community (Arnett, 2012; Piscopo & Mugliett 2012).
In the school sector, special official document featuring the values and impact of the
Home Economics curriculum could be prepared by curriculum officers and
publicised in all schools. This would help to ensure that members of the school
community understood the reach and worth of the subject. For example, one
description could be on how nutrition knowledge and culinary skills learnt in Home
Economics could contribute to healthy living and wise consumption of resources.
In the public domain, it would be beneficial to use the mass media and public
exhibitions to highlight the significance and benefits of Home Economics education.
Many government agencies in Singapore, including the MOE, have already utilised
the mass media and public exhibitions to disseminate information and promote new
government policies. Hence it would be relatively easy to rely upon the existing
274
platforms, such as the MOE Facebook Homepage and the MOE “ExCEL Fest” (an
annual exhibition organised by the MOE to share best teaching practices), to
heighten public awareness and contribute to an improved status of Home Economics
in the community. For example, Home Economics teachers could showcase healthy
dishes or community recycling projects designed and produced by the students using
these platforms.
Achievements of the Study
The implications from this research are wide-ranging, and may be of interest to
policy makers, practitioners and academic researchers. The original contributions this
study makes to the extant knowledge on Home Economics curriculum in Singapore
are summarised as follows.
1. This study presented the first full account regarding the history since
Independence of the development of the Home Economics curriculum in Singapore.
The analysis revealed how the direction of the Home Economics curriculum has been
influenced by external factors relating to global trends in Home Economics
education, and by factors directly related to Singapore’s needs and government
policies.
2. The study further identified the key strengths and foci of the Home Economics
curriculum over time. The analysis found enduring strengths of the curriculum to
include, a commitment to the broadening and increasing sophistication of subject
content, and inclusiveness in respect to the expansion in student base.
275
3. The study presented a snapshot of what curriculum implementation is like from
the teachers’ point of view. In this sense it has contributed to teachers’ insights in
relation to the meanings and values which they ascribe to the teaching/learning of
Home Economics in Singapore.
4. The study identified key challenges encountered by teachers in implementing the
Home Economics curriculum in the Singaporean secondary schools. These
challenges included the need for more curriculum time and better resources, unmet
professional development needs, and misconceptions of the subject and its low
status.
5. The study provided recommendations to address the challenges stated above,
which relevant stakeholders (such as the education authorities, curriculum designers
and school managements) should keep in view.
6. The study helped to address the absence of research in the area of Home
Economics education in Singapore, and contributed to the body of education
literature with respect to this domain.
Implications for further research
The investigative findings have provided previously unexplored insights into the
historical trend of the Home Economics curriculum, as well as current challenges of
Home Economics teachers implementing the curriculum in schools. This information
could serve as ground work, as well as provide a valuable framework, for those that
276
wish to engage in further critique and instigate further studies in regard to the
teaching and learning of Home Economics in Singapore.
In the light of the current research, it may be helpful for future studies to consider the
relevance of the various findings for wider application. This may include further
exploration in respect to the teachers’ perspectives, to complement the knowledge
generated from this study. Potential research designs with extended empirical
examinations could involve recruiting larger samples of participants, and enrolling
more numbers of schools. A larger sample size is more representative of the
population and also broadens the range of possible data.
One relevant exploration regarding teachers’ viewpoint could relate to the
professional development of teachers. For example, further study could be done to
identify the specific training needs of teachers from the different categories, which
include beginning teachers and experienced teachers. Another suitable study could
involve investigating the nature and efficiency of mentoring provided to trainee
teachers and beginning teachers in the schools. The research from such studies will
be of value to education authorities and teachers training institutions in developing
programmes to enhance teachers’ proficiency.
Further research could also be carried out in respect to the contemporary Home
Economics curriculum. Potential areas of study could include investigating the
efficacy of the revised FCE syllabus, and development of the 21st Century
competencies. Other viable research may involve the examination of dominant
teaching pedagogy and approaches used in delivering the Home Economics
277
curriculum, such as inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and utilisation
of ICT. The research from such studies will be of value to curriculum designers in
the planning and formulation of future syllabi.
To this end, research relating to Home Economics education in Singapore is still
scarce. Hence there are broad opportunities for further investigations to present a
more comprehensive and better understanding in this area.
Conclusion
This study has been the first to document the history and development of the Home
Economics curriculum in Singapore, the first to identify the key drivers of
curriculum innovation and the first to assess the achievements and challenges of the
current (2014) curriculum from the perspectives of the teachers responsible for its
delivery. The overall goal of this study was to contribute to the future direction of the
Home Economics curriculum in Singapore. The key understanding here was that
curriculum design is most effective when it is developmental, that is, when it is
responsive, aware and builds on previous expressions of curriculum. To this end
then, to support and enhance future curriculum design, it seemed valuable and logical
to uncover and articulate a history of the Home Economics curriculum and to
identify drivers and trends marking this history. While document collection was
essential to this task, the view was always taken that it was vital to develop
understandings about the curriculum from those who were charged with delivering it.
The study recognised the importance of teacher insights and used these insights to
generate recommendations for future curriculum design.
278
REFERENCES
American Association for the Family and Consumer Sciences. (2012) ‘What is FCS?’.
Retrieved April 30 2012 from http://www.aafcs.org/AboutUs/FCS.asp
Ang, W. H. (2008) ‘Singapore’s Textbook Experience 1965-97: Meeting the Needs of
Curriculum Change’ Chapter 3 in Lee, S.K., Goh, C.B., Fredriksen, B., & Tan J.P.
(eds), Toward a Better Future: Education and Training for Economic Development in
Singapore since 1965. Washington DC: The World Bank. pp. 69-95.
Artnett, S.B. (2012) ‘Problem Encountered by Beginning Family and Consumer Sciences
Teachers’. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 30(2):34-44.
Retrieved December 20 2015, from
http://www.natefacs.org/Pages/v30no2/v30no2ArnettProb.pdf
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2016) ‘Australia Curriculum’.
Retrieved January 12 2017, from http://v7-
5.australiancurriculum.edu.au/technologies/australian-curriculum-connections
Bailey, K. (1994) Methods of Social Research (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Baldwin, E. E. (1989) ‘A critique of home economics curriculum in secondary schools’
Chapter 14 in Hultgren, F.H., & Coomer, D.L. (eds), Alternative Modes of Inquiry in
Home Economics Research. USA: Glencoe Publishing Company. pp.236-250.
279
Berg, B. L. (1998) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (3rd ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Blackledge, D., & Hunt, B. (1991) Sociological Interpretations of Education. London:
Routledge.
Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Bradley, J. (1993) ‘Methodological issues and practices in qualitative research’, Library
Quarterly, 63(4):431-449.
British Nutrition Foundation. (2009) ‘The curriculum’. Retrieved October 10 2013, from
http://www.nutrition.org.uk/foodinschools/curriculum/the-curriculum
Brown, M. M., & Paolucci, B. (1979) Home economics: A definition. Washington, DC:
American Home Economics Association.
Canadian Home Economics Association. (1996) ‘Home Economics/Family Studies
Education in Canadian Schools: A Position Paper’. Canadian Home Economics
Journal, 46(4):168-170. Retrieved September 5 2012, from http://chef-
fcef.ca/journal/documents/1996V46No4.pdf
Cohen, I., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2001) Research Methods in Education. London:
Routledge Falmer.
280
Curriculum Development Council. (1993) Guide to secondary 1 to 5 curriculum. Hong Kong:
Government Printer.
Curriculum Development Council. (2000) Learning to learn – The way forward in
curriculum development, Consultation Document. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Curriculum Development Council and Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority.
(2015) Technology education key learning area: Technology and Living curriculum
and assessment guide (secondary 4-6). Hong Kong: Government Logistics
Department.
Curriculum Planning Division. (1994) Home Economics Syllabus Secondary 1 and 2 Special,
Express and Normal (Academic/Technical) Courses. Singapore: Education
Publication Bureau.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (1998) Home Economics Syllabus Lower
Secondary 1 and 2 Special, Express and Normal (Academic/Technical). Singapore:
Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2001) Home Economics Syllabus Lower
Secondary. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2004) ‘Thematic Approach to teaching
Home Economics’. HE Connexions, 2(13):1-2. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
281
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2005) ‘Notes of Home Economics
Professional Sharing cum Meeting’ on August 12 2005. Singapore: Ministry of
Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2007) Home Economics Syllabus Lower
Secondary 2008. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2012a) Information booklet on ‘Curriculum
Planning & Development Division’. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2012b) Handbook for Curriculum Design,
Development and Implementation. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2013) Food and Consumer Education
Syllabus Launch at the CHIJ Secondary (Toa Payoh) on Tuesday 19 March 2013.
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2014) Food and Consumer Education
Syllabus Lower Secondary 2014. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Department of Health and Family Services. (1998) ‘Food and Nutrition Policy: Summary
Report’. Retrieved April 16 2012, from
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/7918A73E458282A3C
A25748A0005F37D/$File/fnp.pdf
282
Department of Health. (2013) ‘National Nutrition Policy’. Retrieved March 12 2017, from
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/phd-nutrition-health
Department of Health. (2016) ‘Scoping study to inform development of the National
Nutrition Policy for Australia’. Retrieved April 12 2017, from
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/D309AF86C0D09DB
DCA257F7F0077E0CE/$File/1%20-%20Final%20Report%20-
%20National%20Nutrition%20Policy%20Scoping%20Study%20(Report%20and%20
Appendices).PDF
Dewhurst, Y., & Pendergast, D. (2008) ‘Home Economics in the 21st Century: A Cross
Cultural Comparative Study’. International Journal of Home Economics, 1(1):63-87.
Retrieved April 19 2012, from http://aura.abdn.ac.uk/bitstream/2164/727/1/Dewhurst-
Pendergast%20-%20Cross%20cultural%20study.pdf
Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. (2009) ‘Towards a Guide for Novice Researchers on Research
Methodology: Review and Proposed Methods’, Issues in Informing Science and
Information Technology, 6:323-337. Retrieved January 5 2013, from
http://iisit.org/Vol6/IISITv6p323-337Ellis663.pdf
Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2007) ‘The qualitative content analysis process’, Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 62(1):107-115.
283
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (1994) ‘Interviewing: The art of science’ in N.K. Denzin & Y.S.
Lincoln (eds), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 361-
376.
Garrison, C., & Ehringhaus, M. (2006) ‘Formative and Summative assessments in the
Classroom’. Retrieved September 3 2012, from
http://www.amle.org/portals/0/pdf/publications/Web_Exclusive/Formative_Summativ
e_Assessment.pdf
Glaser, B. G. (1978) Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded
theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Goh, C. B., & Gopinathan, S. (2008) ‘The Development of Education in Singapore since
1965’ Chapter 1 in Lee, S.K., Goh, C.B., Fredriksen, B., & Tan J.P. (eds), Toward a
Better Future: Education and Training for Economic Development in Singapore since
1965. Washington DC: The World Bank. pp. 12-38.
Goh, C. T. (1997) Speech by Mr Goh Chok Tong, Prime Minister, at the opening of the 7th
International Conference on Thinking at the Suntec City Convention Centre Ballroom
on Monday 2 June 1997 at 9.00am. Retrieved December 13 2014 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/1997/020697.htm
Goh, K. S. (1979) Report on the Ministry of Education 1978. Singapore: Singapore National
Printers.
284
Gopinathan, S. (2001) ‘Globalisation, the state and education policy in Singapore’ in Tan, J.,
Gopinathan, S., & Ho, W. K. (eds), Challenges Facing the Singapore Education
System Today. Singapore: Prentice Hall. pp. 3-17.
Graham, R. (2013) ‘Bring back Home Economics! The case for a revival of the most retro
class in school’. The Boston Globe, October 13, 2013. Retrieved October 16 2013,
from http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/10/12/bring-back-
home/EJJi9yzjgJfNMqxWUIEDgO/story.html
Habermas, J. (1979) Knowledge and Human interests, trans Jeremy J. Shapiro. London:
Heinemann.
Hearne, E., & Johnston, R. D. (2009) “Raising the Roof: Science, Feminism, and Home
Economics”, Reviews in American History, 37(3):413-419.
Henry, M. I. (1989) ‘Toward a critical theory of Home Economics: The case for family
studies’. Unpublished thesis. University of New England, Australia.
Hirose, B. (2011) ‘Family and Consumer Sciences Teacher Use of Technology to Teach
Higher Order Thinking Skills’. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education,
29(1):7-18. Retrieved October 25 2012, from
http://www.natefacs.org/JFCSE/v29no1/v29no1Hirose.pdf
Home Economics Department, St. Angela’s College. (2010) ‘Submission to: The NCCA
Junior Cycle Review Committee’. Retrieved October 10 2102, from
285
http://www.juniorcycle.ie/NCCA_JuniorCycle/media/NCCA/Curriculum/Research/B
ackground/Consultations/Home_Economics_Department_St_Angela-
s_College_Sligo.pdf
Home Economics Institute of Australia. (2002) ‘Home economics in Queensland schools,
2000’. Journal of the HEIA, 9(2):2-20. Retrieved October 25 2012, from
http://www.heia.com.au/images/Journal9/JHEIA92-1.pdf
Home Economics Institute of Australia. (2010) ‘Position Paper – Home Economics and the
Australian Curriculum’. Retrieved April 16 2012, from
http://www.heia.com.au/images/Journal9/reprinted%20article%20final.pdf
Home Economics Institute of Australia. (2015) ‘Home Economics Institute of Australia Inc.
Annual Report 2015’. Retrieved January 12 2017, from
http://www.heia.com.au/resources/documents/HEIA_Annual%20Report_2015.pdf
Home Economics Institute of Australia. (2016) ‘Home Economics Institute of Australia Inc.
Annual Report 2016’. Retrieved April 24 2017, from
http://www.heia.com.au/resources/documents/HEIA_Annual%20Report_2016_Final.
Home Economics Teachers’ Association. (1986) ‘Report on seminar proceedings: Home
Economics – New Dimensions’. Singapore: Home Economics Teachers’ Association.
286
Ho, W. K., & Gopinathan, S. (1999) ‘Recent Developments in Education in Singapore’.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(1):99-117. Retrieved May 23 2012,
from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan025147.pdf
International Federation of Home Economics. (2008) ‘IFHE Position Statement 2008 - Home
Economics in the 21st Century’. Retrieved April 15 2012, from
http://www.ifhe.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/user_uploa
d/redaktion/Home_Economics/IFHE_Position_Statement_2008.pdf&t=1334574181&
hash=4eb2b9524672952d438853073dbae93a
International Federation of Home Economics. (2009) Press Release for World Home
Economics Day 2009 - 21st March. Retrieved April 15 2012, from
http://www.ifhe.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/user_uploa
d/redaktion/Publications/Press_Releases/PR_WHED_2009_long_web.pdf&t=126980
3698&hash=44febbb3e82af797eeb111cda8311c6d
International Federation of Home Economics. (2016) Press Release for World Home
Economics Day 2016 - 21st March. Retrieved May 9 2016, from
https://www.ifhe.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&g=0&t=1468417002&ha
sh=f26a47e336f065169ce680acb4bcbacbe4bb5570&file=fileadmin/user_upload/reda
ktion/Publications/Press_Releases/PR_WHED_2016_web.pdf
Ito, Y. (2017) ‘Introduction of Kateika (Japanese Home Economics)’ in Nakayama, S., Ito,
Y., Kawamura, M., Fujita, T., & Nishihara, N. (eds), A Textbook for Home Economics
Professionals Learning Program. Japan: Kaishin Ltd. pp. 9-12.
287
Japan Association of Home Economics Education. (2012) Home Economics Education in
Japan 2012. Japan: Japan Association of Home Economics Education.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2007) Education Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and
Mixed Approaches (3rd ed.). USA: Sage.
Kelly, A. V. (1989) The Curriculum Theory and Practice (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman
Publishing Ltd.
Kho, E. M. (2004) ‘Construction of femininity: Girls’ education in Singapore 1959-2000’.
Doctoral thesis. Singapore: National University of Singapore.
Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lai, Y. C., & Lum, E. K. L. (2012) ‘Enhancing teaching and learning of Home Economics in
secondary schools with wikis: An action research study’. Themes in Science and
Technology Education, 5(1/2):45-60. Retrieved October 10 2013 from
http://earthlab.uoi.gr/theste
Lee, H. L. (1997) Speech by Mr Lee Hsieh Loong, Deputy Prime Minister, at the launch of
National Education at the Television Corporation of Singapore TV Theatre on
Saturday 17 May 1997 at 9.30am. Retrieved December 11 2014 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/1997/170597.htm
288
Lee, H. L. (2004) Speech by Mr Lee Hsieh Loong, Prime Minister, at the National Day Rally
2004 at the National University of Singapore Cultural Centre on Sunday 22 August
2004. Retrieved December 19 2014 from
http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/view-
html?filename=2004083101.htm
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005) Practical Research: Planning and Design (8th ed.).
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2007) ‘How computerized work and globalisation shape human
skill demands’ in Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (ed), Learning in the Global Era:
International Perspectives on Globalization and Education. California: University of
California Press. pp. 158-317.
Lichtenstein, A. H., & Ludwig, D. S. (2010) ‘Bring Back Home Economics Education’.
JAMA, 303(18):1857-1858. Retrieved March 21 2012, from
http://www.ifhe.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/user_uploa
d/redaktion/Home_Economics/Subjects/Education/bring_back_home_economics.full.
pdf&t=1335956383&hash=21a282386f756b763da670e8c5b3708d
Lim, E. (1979) ‘Minutes of the Home Economics Standing Committee’. Unpublished
information paper for the Ministry of Education.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic Enquiry. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
289
Ma, A., & Pendergast, D. (2011) ‘The past, the present, and the preferred future for home
economics education in Hong Kong’. International Journal of Consumer Studies,
35(5):589-594. Retrieved April 19 2012, from http://news.cafcs.org/download/Ma-
and-Pendergast-IJCS2011.pdf
Mackenzie, W. (2002) Multiple Intelligences and Instructional Technology. International
Society for Technology in Education: Oregon.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006) Designing Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Matter, A. (1975) Speech by Mr Ahmad Matter, Parliamentary Secretary of Education, at
Home Economics Teachers’ Association Forum at the Seameo Regional English
Language Centre on Saturday 22 February 1975 at 9.30am. Home Economics
Teachers’ Association: ‘Report on forum proceedings: Home Economics its place in
society’.
May, T. (1993) ‘Documentary research.’ Chapter 8 in T. May (1993) Social Research: Issues,
Methods and Process. Buckingham: Open Uni Press.
Merriam, S. B. (1988) Case Study Research in Education. CA: Jossey Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994) An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
290
Mimbs, C. A. (2005) ‘Teaching from the critical thinking, problem-based curricular
approach: strategies, challenges, and recommendations’. Journal of Family and
Consumer Sciences Education, 23(2):7-18. Retrieved October 25 2012, from
http://www.natefacs.org/JFCSE/v23no2/v23no2Mimbs.pdf
Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E., & Alexandra, L. (1990) In-Depth Interviewing:
Researching People. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
Ministry of Education. (1965) Syllabus for Domestic Science in Primary and Secondary
Schools. Singapore: Government Printing Office.
Ministry of Education. (1980) Syllabus and Guidelines for Home Economics in Secondary
Schools. Singapore: Government Printers.
Ministry of Education. (1985) Home Economics Syllabus Secondary 1 and 2 Express/Normal
Course. Singapore: Government Printers.
Ministry of Education (1997) Press Release May 16 1997 ‘Launch of National Education’.
Retrieved December 13 2014, from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/1997/pr01797.htm
Ministry of Education (2008) Press Release August 5 2008 ‘MOE Launches Third
Masterplan for ICT in Education’. Retrieved December 13 2014, from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2008/08/moe-launches-third-masterplan.php
291
Ministry of Education. (2010a) Press Release March 9 2010 ‘MOE to Enhance Learning of
21st Century Competencies and Strengthen Art, Music and Physical Education’.
Retrieved May 5 2013, from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2010/03/moe-to-
enhance-learning-of-21s.php
Ministry of Education. (2010b) Information booklet on ‘Nurturing our young for the future
competencies for the 21st century’. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education. (2012a) Information booklet on ‘Secondary School Education’.
Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education (2012b) ‘About Us: Our Vision’. Retrieved December 13 2014, from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/about/
Ministry of Education (2013) ‘Desired Outcomes of Education’. Retrieved May 5 2013, from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/desired-outcomes/
Ministry of Education. (2014) Information booklet on ‘Secondary School Education: Shaping
the Next Phase of Your Child’s Learning Journey’. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education (2015a) ‘Secondary School Courses’. Retrieved June 2015, from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/secondary/courses/
Ministry of Education (2015b) ‘Education Statistics Digest 2015’. Retrieved February 8
2016, from www.data.gov.sg
292
Ministry of Education (2016a) ‘School Information Service’. Retrieved January 12 2016,
from http://sis.moe.gov.sg/Results.aspx
Ministry of Education (2016b) ‘School Financial Instruction Manual’. Retrieved Novenber
20 2016, from
http://intranet.moe.gov.sg/Search/results.aspx?k=2016%20approved%20school%20o
perating%20fund
Montgomery, B. (2008) ‘Curriculum Development: A Critical Science Perspective’. Journal
of Family and Consumer Science, 26(National Teacher Standards 3)1:16. Retrieved
May 24 2012 from
http://www.natefacs.org/JFCSE/v26Standards3/v26Standards3Montgomery.pdf
Mugliett, K. (2009) ‘ICT integration in the Home Economics classrooms: A study using an
online community of practice’. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Sheffield,
England.
National Institute of Education. (2013) ‘Programme Handbooks’. Retrieved November 4
2013, from http://www.nie.edu.sg/files/ote/Handbooks/Diploma_Programmes_2013-
2014.pdf
National Institute of Education. (2016) ‘Teacher Education’. January 14 2016, from
http://www.nie.edu.sg/teacher-education/
293
New Nation. (1980, January 24) ‘Relating home econs to life’ and ‘A centre that is proving
very popular’. p.3.
Noda, M. (2005) ‘Home Economics Education in Japan’ in Instruction of School Subject.
Aichi: Aichi University of Education. pp. 96-98. Retrieved April 16 2012, from
http://yokyo.aichi-edu.ac.jp/intro/files/seika04_04_9.pdf
O’Donoghue, T. (2007) Planning Your Qualitative Research Project: An introduction to
interpretivist research in education. London: Routledge.
Odu, D. B. (1986) ‘The Methodology of Teaching Home Economics’.
Retrieved April 16 2012,
http://unilorin.edu.ng/journals/education/ije/dec1991/THE%20METHODOLOGY%2
0OF%20TEACHING%20HOME%20ECONOMICS.pdf
Oliva, P. F., & Gordon, W. R. (2013) Developing the Curriculum (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Ong, P. B. (1966) Speech by Mr Ong Pang Boon, Minister for Education, at Teachers’
Training College Graduation Day Ceremony at the Singapore Conference Hall on
Saturday 29 October 1966. Singapore Government Press Statement, MC. Oct 54/66
(Edun).
Ong, P. B. (1968a) Speech by Mr Ong Pang Boon, Minister for Education, at the Resumed
Debate on the Annual Budget Statement of the Minister for Finance at the Parliament
294
House on Thursday 12 December 1968. Singapore Government Press Statement, MC.
Dec 21/68 (Edun).
Ong, P. B. (1968b) Speech by Mr Ong Pang Boon, Minister for Education, at the opening
ceremony of building extension to Fairfield Methodist Girls’ School on Friday 20
December 1968. Singapore Government Press Statement, MC. Dec 35/68 (Edun).
Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation Methods (2nd ed.). London:Sage.
Pendergast, D. (1996) ‘Home Economics: Poststructural theory and the politics of feminism’.
Journal of the Home Economics Institute of Australia, 3(3):26-33. Retrieved October
23 2017, from https://research-
repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/67388/59607_1.pdf?sequence=1
Pendergast, D. (2010) ‘Home Economics: The next 100 years’. Victoria Journal of Home
Economics, 49(2):26-33. Retrieved January 25 2013, from
http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/39203/65725_1.pdf?seq
uence=1
Pendergast, D., McGregor, S., & Turkki, K. (2012) ‘The next 100 years: Creating home
economics futures’ in Pendergast, D., McGregor, S., & Turkki, K. (eds), Creating
Home Economics Futures: The next 100 years. Brisbane: Australian Academic Press.
pp. 3.
295
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Tabman, P. M. (1995) Understanding
Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary
Curriculum Discourses. New York: Peter Lang.
Piscopo, S., & Mugliett, K. (2012) ‘Redefining and repackaging Home Economics: case of a
Mediterranean island’. International Journal of Home Economics, 5(2):264-278.
Retrieved September 17 2013, from
http://www.ifhe.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=3161&file=fileadmin/user_u
pload/redaktion/secure_downloads/MOA/E-Journal/12-REPACKAGING-
HE.pdf&t=1387907130&hash=fc149581746d21e2836940dc674da44f
Punch, K. F. (2009) Introduction to Research Methods in Education. London: Sage.
Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research. A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-
Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Rust, C. (2002) ‘Purposes and principles of assessment’. UK: Oxford Brooks University.
Retrieved May 3 2012, from
http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/briefing_papers/p_p_assessment.p
df
Schiro, M. S. (2013) Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns. United
States of America: SAGE Publications, Inc.
296
Scott, C. (2010) ‘The enduring appeal of ‘learning styles’’. Australia Journal of Education,
54(1):5-17.
Scott, J. (1990) A Matter of Record: Documentary Sources in Social Research. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Seet, A. M. (1991) Speech by Dr Seet Ai Mee, Acting Minister for Community
Development, at the opening of the Home Economics and the Environment Exhibition
at the Singapore Conference Hall on Wednesday 10 July 1991. Singapore
Government Press Release, 21/Jul, 04-1/91/07/10.
Shommo, M. I. (1995) ‘Teaching Home Economics by a Problem-solving Approach in
Sudanese Secondary Schools for Girls’. British Journal of In-Service Education,
21(3):319-330.
Singapore Planned Parenthood Association. (1993) Towards 2000: The Singapore Planned
Parenthood Association Strategic Plan. Singapore: Singapore Planned Parenthood
Association.
Smith, G. (1991) ‘Home economics as a practical art: Preparing students for family life in a
global society’. THESA Newsletter, 32(1):13-15. Retrieved May 1 2012, from
http://bctf.ca/thesa/pdf/Vol32_1Smith.pdf
297
Smith, M. G., & deZwart, M. L. (2011) Education for everyday life: curriculum and
pedagogy in home economics. Retrieved May 5 2012, from
https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/37154
Soo, S. I. (1994) ‘History of Home Economics in Singapore’. Unpublished information paper
for the Ministry of Education.
Stearns, P.N. (2006) Consumerism in World History: The global transformation of desire
(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998) Basics of qualitative research. California: Sage.
Street, P. (2006) ‘Home Economics Education in New Zealand: A Position Statement’.
Retrieved April 16 2012 from nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/content/.../456/.../hee-position-
statement.doc
Sullivan, B. M. (1988) ‘Report of the British Columbia Royal Commission on Education’.
Retrieved April 15 2012, from
http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/files/legacyforlearnerssummary.pdf
Sweeney, K. M. (2009) ‘Generating more effective learning using Assessment for Learning
principles’ Home Economics Matters, 2:18-21. Retrieved May 3 2012, from
http://homeeconomics.slss.ie/resources/c/8/10/Home%20Ec%20Matters%202.pdf
298
Tan, J., & Gopinathan, S. (2000) ‘Education reform in Singapore: Towards greater creativity
and innovation?’. National Institute for Research Advancement Review, 7(3):5-10.
Retrieved May 5 2013, from
http://www.apecknowledgebank.org/resources/downloads/SingaporeCurriculumRefor
mCreativity.pdf
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998) Introduction to qualitative research methods. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Teachers of Home Economics Specialist Association. (1988) ‘Submission to Royal
Commission on Education by Teachers of Home Economics Specialist Association’.
THESA Newsletter, 28(4):20-27. Retrieved October 21 2012, from
http://bctf.ca/thesa/pdf/Vol28_4RoyalComm.pdf
Temasek Polytechnic. (2013) ‘Diploma Prospectus’. Retrieved November 4 2013, from
http://www.tp.edu.sg/schools/asc/asc_cst.pdf
Teo, C. H. (1997) Speech by Mr Teo Chee Hean, Minister of Education, at the launch of The
Masterplan for IT in Education at the Suntec City on Monday 28 April 1997 at 10am.
Retrieved December 13 2014 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/1997/280497.htm
Tesch, R. (1990) Qualitative Research: Analysis Types & Software Tools. Bristol, PA:
Falmer Press.
299
Tharman, S. (2004) Speech by Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Acting Minister for
Education, at the Tier 1 Innovation & Enterprise Workshop on Monday 16 February
2004. HE Connexions, 2(14):1-3. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Tharman, S. (2005) Speech by Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Minister for Education, at the
MOE Work Plan Seminar 2005 at the Ngee Ann Polytechnic Convention Centre on
Thursday 22 September 2005 at 10am. Retrieved December 19 2104 from
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/2005/sp20050922.htm
The Straits Times. (1965, July 28) ‘New schools plan to boost economy’. p.15
The Straits Times. (1968, January 2) ‘Citizens fit in mind, body is aim of new education
policy: Ong’. p.4
The Straits Times. (1984, September 9) ‘Cooking a must for the girls’. p.1
The Straits Times. (1984, November 24) ‘428 petition against compulsory home econs’. p.21
The Straits Times. (1984, November 27) ‘Boys should also do home econs: Ministry’. p.1
The Straits Times. (1986, April 29) ‘What Home Economics is dishing out today’. p.2
The Straits Times. (1991, July 11) ‘Home Economics a must for Sec 1 pupils from 1994’.
p.23
300
The Straits Times. (1993, August 31) ‘Home Econs, Technical Studies for Secondary students
from ‘97’. p.18
The Straits Times. (1996, March 30) ‘Boys-, girls-only courses open to all’. p.25
The Straits Times online. (2013, July 16) ‘Students to get more lessons on handling money
under new syllabus’. Retrieved September 30 2013, from
http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/students-get-more-
lessons-handling-money-under-new-syllabus-20130716
The Sunday Times. (2013, October 20) ‘Teenagers to learn how to manage finances. p.21
Tyler, R. W. (1949) Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Veit, H. Z. (2011) ‘Time to Revive Home Economics’. The New York Times, September 5
2011. Retrieved October 16 2013, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/opinion/revive-home-economics-classes-to-
fight-obesity.html
Walker, D. F. (1971) ‘A Naturalistic Model for Curriculum Development’. School Review,
80(1): 51-67.
Watase, N. (2009) Presentation transcript on ‘Nurturing Leadership in Students through
Home Economics Education’. Retrieved April 18 2012, from
301
http://www.slideshare.net/LGRIS/5nurturing-leadership-in-students-through-home-
economics-education-noriko-watase
Weber, R. P. (1990) Basic Content Analysis. Newburry Park, CA: Sage.
Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2005) Research Methods in Education: An Introduction (8th ed.).
USA: Pearson.
Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2002) Mass Media Research: An Introduction (7th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Woo, B. L. (1978) ‘Brief history of Home Economics in Singapore’. Unpublished
information paper for the Ministry of Education.
Woods, P. (1992) ‘Symbolic interactionism: theory and method’ in M. LeCompte, W.Milroy
& J.Preissle (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education. San Diego, CA:
Academic Press. pp.337-404.
Yip, S. K. J., Eng, S. P., & Yap, Y. C. J. (1997) ‘25 Years of Educational Reform’ Chapter 1
in Tan, J., Gopinathan, S. & Kam, H.W. (eds), Education in Singapore: A Book of
Readings. Singapore: Prentice Hall. pp.3-32.
Zhang, J. (2005) Content Analysis of Websites from 2000 to 2004: A Thematic Meta-Analysis.
Unpublished Master’s thesis. Texas: Texas A&M University. Retrieved January 5
302
2013, from http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/2639/etd-tamu-2005B-
STJR-Zhang.pdf?sequence=1
Zhang, Y., & Mildemuth, B. M. (2009) ‘Qualitative Analysis of Content’ in B. Mildemuth
(ed), Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and
Library Science. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. pp308-319.
303
APPENDICES Appendix 1: Participant Information Form – Interviews
304
Appendix 2: Participant Information Form – Oral Histories
305
Appendix 3: Participant Consent Form
306
Appendix 4: List of Interview Questions
Oral histories:
1. What were the influences that generated the creation and implementation of the different
curricula from 1965 to 2014?
2. What were the continuities between the different curricula implemented from 1965 to
2014?
3. What were the changes between the different curricula implemented from 1965 to 2014?
One-to-one interview:
1. What are your perspectives regarding the following: goal and objectives of the FCE
syllabus; structure of the syllabus; syllabus content; recommended teaching strategies;
assessment format and weighting; recommended curriculum time; facilities and resources;
teachers’ competency and training?
2. What do you intend to achieve through the Home Economics curriculum?
3. What strategies do you use to achieve your aims with regard to the curriculum?
4. What issues and concerns have you encountered when implementing the curriculum?
5. What are the systems and procedure in place to deal with these issues and concerns?
6. What improvements would you suggest for the future development of the curriculum?
Focus group interview:
1. What are your comments with regard to the issues and concerns raised by the FCE
teachers?
2. What do you think of the strategies used by the teachers to deal with these issues and
concerns?
3. Are there different strategies that you would use to resolve these issues and concerns?
307
Appendix 5: Coding Example - Documentary Data Excerpt from Food and Consumer Education Syllabus Lower Secondary 2014 (CPDD, 2014)
308
Appendix 6: Coding Example – Interview Transcripts Excerpt from one-to-one interview: Type of schools IDP: Independent school AUT: Autonomous school MST: Mainstream school Category of teachers C1: Teacher with more than three years of teaching experience C2: Teacher with less than three years of teaching experience Q2. What do you intend to achieve through the Home Economics curriculum? School Transcript Coding IDP 1 C1: I want to focus on the aspect of life skills. A recent survey on
the pupils’ profile in my school revealed that our students lack of practical cooking skills. However they are interested to learn more about culinary skills and baking, and would like to have more hands-on cooking lessons. I also intend to incorporate Consumer Education into the Food Studies curriculum. I believe that students will benefit from understanding how to work out the budget when buying ingredients for their cooking sessions. And this is also part of teaching life skills as they can use this knowledge in their daily life. I want to impart the knowledge on coursework skills, such as analysing of task, research and evaluation. Eventually these skills that the students learn will be valuable to them when they attend tertiary institutions. At the tertiary institutions, students will be able to utilise the process skills to complete the work for their study tasks. And they may even perform well as they were already familiar with these skills when they did their Home Economics project in the secondary school.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – culinary skills Teaching/ learning of life skills - financial literacy Teaching/ learning of process skills – analysis, research and evaluation
C2: My focus is on educating students in nutrition knowledge as I find that our students have insufficient knowledge in this area. Since we are facing a global problem in obesity and diet-related diseases, the understanding of nutrition concepts is important for everyone to grasp. I also intend to teach the students the different processes of the coursework skills. Process skills such as research and reflection are important information that our students must acquire. These skills are beneficial to them in many aspects of their life. For example, research skill is useful when one needs to gather thorough and
Teaching/ learning of life skills - nutrition knowledge Teaching/ learning of process skills – research and reflection
309
relevant information to make a wise decision. And reflection skill will help a person to review and improve on his or her performance related to any matter.
IDP 2 C1: I will like to teach my students about life skills, such as consumerism. These are important knowledge that our younger generation need to learn in this subject. As a global city, consumer education is essential and good understanding in this area will benefit the person in his or her daily living.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – consumer education
C2: My school has a strong Peranakan culture and our mission is for our students to remember their roots and foster a good understanding in this culture. We want to achieve “Kim Gek”, which implies a wholesome development of the student in Peranakan culture. Hence I would like to infuse this idea and mission into the Home Economics curriculum. Because this strong Peranakan background is unique to my school, it is up most important to achieve this aim.
Flexibility to ‘customise’ syllabus – based on school needs Strategies to enhance lesson delivery
IDP 3
C1: I believe that it is crucial to impart a good understanding of life skills in our curriculum. Since our modern society has seen more parents working full-time without a main caregiver in the family, our students must be equipped with the essential life skills, such as know how to do some simple cooking, to help them get through in this kind of situation.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – culinary skills
C2: I also feel that it is important to teach life skills in our Home Economics curriculum. We should focus on understanding basic nutrition knowledge and practical cooking skills, as food and eating are daily affairs that everybody need to handle in their daily living.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –nutrition knowledge and culinary skills
AUT 1 C1: My aim is to teach our students life skills in the FCE lessons. My focus is on the learning of practical skills and nutrition knowledge. It is also important that they can apply the knowledge that they have learnt in real-life situations. I also believe that these skills are valuable to them throughout their whole life.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –nutrition knowledge and culinary skills
C2: I feel that a lot of people (such as parents, friends and colleagues) have a misunderstanding that FCE is a subject that only deals with cooking. Hence I will like to change this mindset or wrong perception that people hold about this subject through the delivery of the curriculum. This subject actually teaches many other aspects of knowledge besides just cooking.
Need to eliminate misconception of subject
310
AUT 2 C1: I would like to equip our students with a basic knowledge of food, health, nutrition and culinary skills. These knowledge and skills are very important and useful, even when one left school after completing his education and step into a working adult’s life.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –nutrition knowledge and culinary skills
C2: Besides teaching nutritional knowledge and cooking skills, my other intention is to impart the basic principles of consumer education to my students. Consumerism is an essential part of everyday living regardless of a person’s age and status hence the FCE curriculum must be able to deliver this knowledge to our students.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – consumer education
AUT 3 C1: The knowledge in proper nutritional concepts and basic cooking skills are the important aspects that I want to teach our students in the FCE curriculum. Due to the common usage of internet, our young generation may be misled by incorrect information that they obtain online. Hence it is important that we deliver the correct nutritional knowledge through our FCE lessons. Also our students have less opportunity to cook at home nowadays, so we should provide them the chance to learn basic cooking skills in school.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –nutrition knowledge and culinary skills
C2: As health-related problems are a big issue in the society today, I will like our students to understand the importance of healthy eating and also be able to choose their food wisely. This means that we should incorporate nutrition knowledge and consumer education together when implementing our FCE curriculum. For example, learning how to read food labels in Consumer Studies will also relate to understanding the functions of nutrients in Food Studies.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –incorporating nutrition knowledge and consumer education
MST 1 C1: My intention is for students to learn about life skills, in acquiring knowledge that will be useful throughout their life. I believe that FCE is a subject that is able to achieve this intention because of the areas of study involved, such as health and nutrition knowledge, the teaching of culinary skills and consumer education.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –nutrition knowledge, culinary skills and consumer education
C2: The learning outcomes that I want to achieve through the FCE curriculum are stated in the FCE syllabus. I agree to all the objectives and rationale in the syllabus but I also want my students to be a passionate FCE student. They should be keen to learn and ready to apply the knowledge and skills which they have learnt in the FCE lessons in their daily lives.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – application of knowledge and skills
311
MST 2 C1: I would like to impart skills that are can be useful to the students even after they have left school. I understand this is also the main intention of our FCE curriculum. Besides nutrition knowledge, my other focus is on food safety issues and financial literacy. People are more complacent nowadays and many miss out on the importance of keeping food safe and eating safe food. It is also crucial to teach students how to manage individual and household budget. I hope to emphasise these two areas in the delivery of my FCE lessons.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – focus on food safety and financial literacy
C2: My main intention through the FCE curriculum is the application of knowledge in real life situations. It will not be beneficial if the students do not apply what they learnt in schools in their daily lives. Furthermore, if students found that they are able to apply their knowledge and skills to good use, they will relate better to the topics that are taught in class. And this will motivate them to learn further and hence develop strong interest in the subject.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – application of knowledge and skills
MST 3 C1: It is important for our students to learn about life skills through the FCE curriculum. And I want to be able to engage the students in this aspect, through the teaching of cooking skills and financial literacy. These are the knowledge that will last with them forever, and they can apply these skills in any stage of their lives.
Teaching/ learning of life skills –culinary skills and financial literacy
C2: I find that it is crucial to teach about life skills in our subject. Also students should be able to use the knowledge, in order to develop a better understanding on what they have learnt. I also intend to change the mindset that people have about FCE, that this subject is related to only learning about domestic tasks. I feel that we have not yet reach the stage that others view this subject as being important and holistic.
Teaching/ learning of life skills – application of knowledge and skills Need to eliminate misconception of subject