by A/P Louis Ng
How can legislation and policymaking tackle the root causes of social issues? What makes them powerful tools for driving positive change? This course helps students explore these questions while learning how to work with parliaments to drive real change. Drawing on first-hand experiences from Parliament and civil society, it shows how policymaking is shaped and how grassroots voices can influence outcomes. Through debates, field visits, guest speakers and interactive discussions, students will gain both insights and practical skills, learning how to engage MPs, navigate parliamentary processes and use legislation and policymaking as a force for equity, justice and lasting impact.
Anonymous AY25/26 Sem 2
Content (Structure/Organization)
The course was well-structured, if only the guest lecturers' sharings and our questions during Q&A were more related to the themes of the course.
I found the second reflection essay quite hard to write because if I don't really have a cause that I am particularly interested in championing currently, then it becomes hard to write that essay. I have no choice but to write it more generally and be less specific. Maybe the assignment can be more general about what we have learnt.
But overall, I am definitely much more familiar with the parliamentary process now, and of policy and law-making.
Manageability of Workload
Workload is very manageable although it is a bit back-loaded but the word limit is lower for us to be concise so it is ok. 2 Reflection Essays, 2 Motion Speeches.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades
Getting A is achievable if you are someone who would usually keep up with Singapore's political scene and our domestic issues (if you scroll reddit lol), and if you have a cause that you are passionate about for enacting change in society.
Learning Value/Recommendation
Very useful, I learnt about the inner workings of parliament and the legislative process in a society, that is not immediately obvious to the public.
About the Instructor
Prof facilitated class discussions well. He has good storytelling for us to learn from his life experience, and synthesises the key takeaways of how he managed to be successful well.
He could elaborate more on his vision of why he invited all the different stakeholders during the second half of the course (like share with us his vision of how we could possibly work with all the various stakeholders to enact change) so that we can ask them better questions. It would be good if he could also share this with the stakeholders themselves so that their guest lectures would be more related to the course.
I feel that at the start when explaining the parliamentary process, it would be good if prof went slower and explained more in depth, even if it gets very technical, but that is unavoidable and necessary.
I also wish that at the end of the adjournment motion debates, Prof would tell us who he feels won the debate and why, or which parts of our speeches stood out to him, so that we can understand how to debate better.
Prof is very experienced in his work and he really opened up lots of opportunities for us from the parliament visits in SG and KL to the various dialogue sessions with MPs as well as all the guest lecturers that we could learn from.
Additional Comments/Word of Advice
Be ready with a topic you are passionate about - you will be spending a lot of time developing these ideas!
Anonymous AY25/26 Sem 2
About the Instructor
Before I dive into the review, there are two disclaimers that Prof mentioned: that he would not be teaching in this course per-se, and we were not being groomed to become MPs (debatable).
For the minority of lessons that he conducted, he used his experience in Parliament to share how he for instance, got the Speaker of Parliament to let him ask questions before others. There was also some case studies that he went through to show how there were different ways to push for change besides asking during Question Time. These lessons were basically lectures, as there was virtually no class discussion, and sometimes we watched multiple videos, each for a few minutes, of his speeches and replies, etc.
The majority of lessons were external sharings or visits, which Prof usually moderated, more so for the visits. For the sharings, he took questions on behalf of the speaker and reminded them of the scope of the question, etc. We met representatives from the Malaysian Parliament, Singapore Parliament, private sector, academia, and think tanks. Most speakers, naturally, did not share much as there were no safeguards such as NDAs or Chatham House Rule. But there were a minority that shared frankly their planning considerations, etc, which was very insightful. One of the visits to a Malaysian think tank was particularly distasteful as very little time was allocated for Q&A, and frankly, it just seemed like a data grab as they asked us for our perspectives on various issues in Singapore.
We also had to organise a roadshow together with the ASEAN Inter-parliamentary Assembly. I felt that more support could have been given in terms of budget, venue booking and incentives to woo visitors. However, this may not be the case for subsequent batches as the roadshow travels to a different ASEAN country every year.
This class workload peaked towards finals as there were two consecutive debates and an essay (the first essay was before week 7). Instructions could have been clearer in terms of how the debate would have been run. Both were akin to Model UN although the model government frequently chose to defend the government's stance instead of accepting any amendments or resolutions as there was not much time.
Content (Structure/Organization)
As said, I feel that the debates could have been spread out, as especially for the model government, they are expected to come up with rebuttals on the spot. This meant a deep understanding of policies, especially as Prof would also chime in with his own questions.
Additionally, the field trip to Malaysia could have been better, although this is not really Prof's fault as I am sure he tried his best to coordinate and align expectations. It is just disappointing that we did not have much interaction, including with locals.
Manageability of Workload
As said, crunch time is towards finals. But it is still manageable, given the wonders of today's technology.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades
Prof seems to be more liberal than most profs. As long as you follow his tips especially for the essays, I think you should be set. As for the debates, half of your grade is determined by your classmates, with the other half by Prof.
Learning Value/Recommendation
I now have a deeper understanding of policies such as in manpower and education. But besides understanding the trade-offs and concerns that the government has, the part about working with parliaments as a student is largely left up to you to determine. Besides, of course, Prof's tips such as pushing for a small change at first, his case study of how ACRES' ideology developed over the years, etc.
Additional Comments/Word of Advice
Prof did say that he also wanted to go to the Indonesian Parliament, and if there were to be another visit to the Malaysian Parliament, that the class would travel via bus, not plane. I would say the main benefit of this course, as what Prof says also, is meeting people you would likely never meet if not for this course.