When people look at Singapore’s schools, they often ask what policies, initiatives or reforms sit behind the system’s eye-catching success. But during a recent delegation organised by the British Council and the Department for Education, what became clear very quickly is that Singapore’s success rests on something deeper. It rests on a shared understanding that education is a nation-building project, with teachers and leaders as the nation-builders, entrusted with shaping both individuals and society. This framing creates a strong sense of moral purpose and shared meaning. In every student’s journal, the front cover states that “the purpose of education in Singapore is to create a sense of hope”. Thinking big is clearly part of education’s DNA. And it’s not just scale, it’s about long-term horizons too. Fidelity and continuity of vision running across decades has led to stable, cumulative improvement, rather than reactive policy churn. Within this frame, competition between schools has intentionally been replaced by shared responsibility. Every school a ‘good school’ Every school is positioned as a “good school”, contributing to the strength of the whole system. This fosters collaboration, professional generosity and stewardship, reinforcing the idea that educators serve something larger than their own school. And what this appears to do in practice is fascinating. It hardwires an infrastructure of meaning. Singaporean educators experience their work as purposeful, valued and connected to a broader national mission. And this in turn strengthens commitment, identity and belonging within the profession. The language that is used is quite intentional too, shaping how teachers and leaders think, act and relate to their students and families. Consistent, non-deficit, enabling language is used across the system, schools and services, creating a shared framework. For example, designated school staff who work with families from more disadvantaged communities are known not as a “support worker” or “liaison officer” but as a “family coach”. Supportive language Singaporean children with SEND are called “SwANs” – students with additional needs. This language positions teachers and leaders as supportive partners and guardians of development. And because this is a shared vocabulary that extends beyond a single school or set of schools, there is a universally inclusive mindset and genuinely collective responsibility for every child. In this way, language does more than describe reality, it helps create and shape it. It builds shared assumptions, psychological safety and professional clarity. This clarity was also highly visible when we looked at how individual schools operate and their relationship with the centre. In Singapore all schools are run by the Ministry of Education. All headteachers are regarded as civil servants and schools and operate through a model of “decentralised centralisation”. The centre provides clear direction, shared values and strong coherence, while leaders and teachers are trusted to exercise professional judgement within this framework. This balance allows educators to feel both guided and empowered. Systems and structures are intentionally designed to support leaders rather than constrain them, ensuring that administrative architecture reinforces, rather than undermines educational purpose. The clarity and coherence allows teachers and leaders to focus their energy on teaching, leadership and student development. Trust in teachers Underpinning all of this is trust. The Singaporean system assumes that educators and leaders are committed professionals capable of exercising sound judgment. Accountability processes are developmental rather than punitive, designed to support growth, learning and continuous improvement. But importantly, this trust is not blind. It is constructed through careful design, alignment, and investment in people. The architecture of the system is effectively “cemented” together through this sense of trust, enabling stability and confident, collective effort. One reason Singapore is able to sustain this kind of coherence is political continuity. The country has been governed by the same political party for decades, allowing educational vision and policy to develop steadily over time rather than resetting with each electoral cycle. That stability makes long-term thinking possible in ways that are much harder to replicate in England. But there is another structural factor that is often overlooked. Singapore’s entire system comprises only around 300 schools. That is still a large and complex system, but it is also a scale at which shared culture, language and professional expectations can demonstrable be shaped and sustained. Coherence is not beyond our reach In England, our national system is far larger and more fragmented. Yet the growth of academy trusts means that, in practice, parts of our system are beginning to operate at a similar order of scale. Take, for instance, the recent news that United Learning will be merging with another smaller trust, making it the first trust to exceed 100 schools if it goes ahead. Trusts are not only growing in scale. In the very best organisations, they are also creating a shared language, shared expectations and a long-term professional culture across their schools. With 65 schools, REAch2 is nothing close to the size of Singapore, but we pride ourselves on doing just that. Political stability is beyond the control of the profession in England. But system culture is not. The responsibility for creating purpose, shaping culture and professional identity increasingly sits with the institutions that hold schools together. If large trusts can cultivate the kind of shared culture and long-term orientation seen in Singapore, then coherence is not beyond our reach. Central policy will help, but Singapore showed me that timeless constants come from the institutions willing to think and act with the same long horizon – starting with lifting up the teaching profession as true “nation builders”.