SINGAPORE – Training courses with low ratings are being weeded out and held to higher standards by SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG), as part of efforts to raise the quality of such programmes.

       The agency will suspend such courses for three months, and prior to suspension bar their providers from promoting the courses or accepting new applicants. Training providers will have to use the suspension period, or longer if they choose, to improve their course before rejoining the SkillsFuture directory.

       This new measure, which has been in place since October, is the first of several that the national body for skills development will implement by 2026 to raise the quality of courses.

       From Jan 1, 2025, courses due for renewal must meet new criteria, including achieving at least a 75 per cent attendance rate. Providers must continue to ensure their courses are relevant to industry needs.

       By June 2026, courses will have to secure a minimum response rate of 75 per cent for their feedback survey, and not be ranked in the lowest-quality category, said Ms Angela Tan, group director of SSG’s regulation and quality group, in an interview with The Straits Times.

       Ms Tan said the new measures are part of SSG’s ongoing efforts to strengthen the quality of courses.

       There are more than 29,000 SkillsFuture courses, offered by over 600 training providers. In 2023, 520,000 people took part in SSG-supported training programmes, around 200,000 of whom were mid-career workers.

       By signing up, I accept SPH Media's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy as amended from time to time.

       Previously, the criteria for courses to be renewed included showing activity during their validity period – such as issuing certificates or having paid claims – and staying relevant to industry needs.

       Since October, courses have faced suspension if they fail to meet certain requirements, said Ms Tan.

       Those with the lowest quality ratings – based on survey feedback designed to capture participants’ perceptions of SSG-funded courses – will be removed from the course directory before their planned expiry dates, she added.

       The survey, called TRAQOM (Training Quality and Outcomes Measurement), includes 30 questions to gauge what participants thought about courses after they completed it.

       Training providers offering courses with low ratings will be given three months to stop their marketing and accepting new participants for those courses, as well as complete the programme for those enrolled, said Ms Tan.

       Following that, they have to take a minimum of three months to make improvements before they can apply for their courses to be in the SkillsFuture directory again.

       Since November 2023, SSG has stepped up its assessment of training providers, to ensure they have good training methods, can provide learners with administrative support, and have good trainer and course ratings.

       The agency has reviewed about 170 training providers so far – about 25 per cent of those funded by SSG.

       Ms Tan said 25 providers either were terminated or chose to withdraw voluntarily due to issues such as poor organisation and course quality.

       Those who fail to meet SSG’s standards will be deregistered and have their funding terminated within a month. They may reapply, subject to SSG’s conditions, 12 months after being terminated.

       Names of deregistered providers can be found on Training Partners Gateway, a website that offers digital services and resources for training providers.

       ST spoke to five training providers, which said the new measures will help to raise standards and increase transparency in the adult learning sector.

       “The standard for audit is much higher than before,” said Mr Kai Tan, a business development executive at Biz IQ academy, which specialises in culinary and creative courses.

       “The survey also provides transparency on how we fare against other providers and courses,” said Mr Tan, adding that the strict criteria help to filter out lower-quality providers and encourage better governance in the sector.

       Mr Anson Kuah, managing director of @ASK Training, which offers courses such as digital marketing and leadership, said the new initiatives “reinforce the value of quality education and ensure learners truly benefit from the courses”.

       “It definitely raises the bar for training providers by focusing on course quality and consistency in terms of processes and training methods,” he said.

       However, while these measures are “important and timely”, they should be applied carefully, said associate professor in practice Terence Ho of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.

       “It is important that the criteria not be applied bluntly, and that course ratings are interpreted sensibly,” said Prof Ho, citing instances where the respondent pool is small or feedback is poor for reasons beyond the training provider’s control.

       He acknowledged that the measures provide greater confidence for learners, but said other factors – like cost and time commitment – also influence people’s willingness to take up courses.

       The minimum quality bar cannot be set too high, said Prof Ho, such that “reasonably good or credible courses” cannot meet the cut.

       One of the concerns is that as lower-grade providers and courses are sifted out, those that were once considered average may become part of the lower quantile, said KnowledgeTree Training Centre senior manager Syarif Ahmad.

       KnowledgeTree offers cyber-security and basic security officer courses, among other security-related programmes.

       Mr Syarif voiced concern that the bar could keep getting raised, to a point where it becomes unrealistic for training providers to meet the standard.

       Mr Kuah of @ASK Training said some feedback could be misleading if learners’ expectations are not aligned with the course’s goals, which could unfairly impact the provider’s ratings.

       The training providers were divided about the three-month period to improve courses – some felt it strikes a balance for issues that are easier to fix, while others said it lacks flexibility.

       A spokeswoman for EduQuest, which offers retail and baking courses, among others, suggested having a review mid-way through the improvement period to provide a clearer assessment of whether providers are on track.

       Extensions could be granted if training providers show evidence of the improvements they are making, she said, adding that this will help if the changes take time. “This would prevent a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach towards training providers.”

       Mr Jefrey Gomez, chief executive of ClickAcademy Asia, which offers courses in marketing, sales and leadership, said a longer period, possibly up to six months, may be better for providers who face more significant challenges trying to meet the requirements.

       Still, the new requirements are necessary for both large and small companies, said KnowledgeTree’s Mr Syarif.

       Describing KnowledgeTree as a small company with 10 full-time staff, he said: “These criteria make sure that only those that are serious about training will enter the industry. If you put in the work, the standards are not impossible, even for small companies.”