ITE College East Latest News 2026 | iScore Inclusive Carnival Game, Cerebral Palsy Access and Technology Award

ITE College East’s iScore team received a Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award on 19 May 2026 for an inclusive version of a carnival ball-rolling game. Five students designed motor-assisted ball guidance operated through large left-right buttons, with a default release after 40 seconds and a manual override for players who need more time. The project had previously taken first place at the Singtel × LionsForge Inclusive Hackathon in 2025.

This independent eduKateSingapore guide, reviewed 12 November 2026, identifies the developers and explains how a game can be redesigned for more accessible participation. It distinguishes a technology-award-winning prototype from clinical equipment or a guarantee of accessibility for every player, and provides practical 2027 ITE engineering admissions guidance.

Quick facts and important distinctions

2026: Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award at ITE’s Student Achievers’ Awards on 19 May.
ITE College East team leader Ong Di Jing Roger, with Nur Serianni Binte Muhammad Rossuandi, Muhammad Al Aqmal Iqram Bin Abdul Kader, Kwek Kai Le Terance and Lee Yee Meng.
Course backgrounds: Nitec Mechanical Technology, Higher Nitec Mechanical Engineering and Higher Nitec Electrical Engineering.
The game uses a DC motor, linear rail, large left-right buttons and a solenoid ball-release component.
ITE describes a 40-second automatic release with a manual override for additional play time.
2025, not 2026: first place at Singtel × LionsForge Inclusive Hackathon and a demonstration at Singtel Carnival.
The prototype’s intention is wider play access; no universal user testing or medical certification is established.

Reviewed 12 November 2026. Independent eduKateSingapore guide. Featured image illustrates learning and is not a documentary image of the iScore developers, the prototype or users.

Confirmed 2025–2026 competition history

2025 Singtel × LionsForge Inclusive Hackathon

ITE’s official iScore profile records a first-place result at the 2025 Singtel × LionsForge Inclusive Hackathon and a subsequent showcase at Singtel Carnival. Both events preceded the national 2026 award.

The 2025 history matters because reports can mistakenly repeat the earlier prize as though it occurred at the May 2026 ceremony.

19 May 2026 Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award

The 19 May Student Achievers’ Awards identified ten winning Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award teams. The iScore project was credited to College East and described as an adaptation of a traditional carnival game.

An innovation prize recognises design and ingenuity, not automatically a completed independent accessibility assessment or universal consumer-product certification.

How inclusive carnival game engineering works

The five-person team

The official profile names leader Ong Di Jing Roger and members Nur Serianni Binte Muhammad Rossuandi, Muhammad Al Aqmal Iqram Bin Abdul Kader, Kwek Kai Le Terance and Lee Yee Meng.

Their programmes cover Mechanical Technology, Mechanical Engineering and Electrical Engineering. The public source does not allocate all individual engineering tasks, so the whole team should receive credit.

How the original game created a barrier

Traditional carnival ball-rolling games may assume players can grip, aim and release a ball using a particular hand movement. Those assumptions can exclude people with different motor abilities.

iScore explores whether a player can retain meaningful choices without needing the same physical action. The broader lesson is to separate the purpose of a game from a traditional way of playing it.

What iScore changes

The prototype offers large directional buttons connected to a motor-assisted guide. A player positions a ball using controls rather than manually rolling it.

The mechanism changes the movement required for participation. Its actual suitability still depends on each user’s reach, abilities, comprehension and preferences, which cannot be established for everyone from one award summary.

The manual override

ITE describes an automatic release after 40 seconds for game flow, together with a manual override when additional time is needed. That combines a predictable event schedule with a measure of player flexibility.

Time limits can unintentionally make games inaccessible. The manual option is a useful design feature to discuss, though the public profile does not detail every way users access it.

Large buttons and control placement

Prominent buttons can reduce reliance on precise small movements, and placing them at a wheelchair-friendly height may help some players reach them. However, button force, posture, visibility and surrounding space still matter.

A student can sketch a paper game control panel and ask volunteers whether instructions are clear. Such a test explores communication without establishing suitability for any particular medical condition.

Cerebral palsy and individual variation

Cerebral palsy can affect movement in different ways. The project explicitly considers people with limited motor control, including some users with cerebral palsy, but this should not become an assumption that every person has identical needs.

An inclusive design process respects the person’s preferences and involves appropriate user feedback. The goal is equitable access to recreation, not describing players as passive recipients of charity.

What a DC motor contributes

A DC motor can produce controlled movement when supplied with appropriate electrical inputs. In iScore it is described as helping move and position the ball.

This is a useful example of electrical and mechanical systems working together. Powered equipment requires professional safety considerations, and a general article is not permission to replicate the device.

What a linear rail contributes

A linear rail guides movement along a defined direction. For a game, controlled positioning can help translate simple user inputs into a physical outcome.

Students can sketch a conceptual mechanism and identify where movement should begin and end. Do not infer independent safety certification or mechanical tolerances from the short project description.

The solenoid release concept

ITE lists a solenoid-operated release for the ball. A solenoid can initiate an electrically controlled mechanical action.

An aspiring learner can understand the idea through a block diagram. The real design would require testing for safe operation and faults; this article does not include construction or modification instructions.

Why a plywood structure was chosen

The project record mentions a plywood structure and modular components intended to support portability and repeated community use. Materials and modularity can influence product cost, transport and repair.

The public document does not provide quantified durability tests, load ratings or a commercial production plan. A design intention should not be rewritten as independently verified performance.

An accessible game is more than accessible controls

A player also has to reach the booth, understand the instructions and know when their turn begins. An otherwise promising device can still exclude participants if its venue, signage or queuing arrangement creates barriers.

A class can design a fictional carnival floor plan and list questions about approach space, assistance, visibility and optional participation. This demonstrates user-centred planning without testing powered equipment.

Participation is not a medical treatment

The game is intended to support enjoyable recreation, not to diagnose or treat cerebral palsy. A technology project can be socially useful even when it has no clinical role.

Writers should not claim the game improves neurological function without suitable evidence. A person may enjoy playing differently from others, and that choice deserves respect.

What the 2025 carnival showcase suggests

ITE says iScore was demonstrated at Singtel Carnival 2025 and was well received. That is useful context about public interest.

It is not a published controlled study with known sample sizes or satisfaction percentages. A future report should distinguish anecdotal reception from measured accessibility outcomes.

How to test a user interface responsibly

A safe design exercise can compare two paper layouts with different labels or button sizes. Volunteers can explain what they expect to happen when each button is selected.

The student should collect only necessary feedback and describe observations accurately. No participant should be asked to disclose medical history for a casual classroom exercise.

Game fairness and multiple ways to play

A fixed countdown may make one version of a game exciting but exclude someone who needs more time. Offering optional rules can maintain enjoyment while broadening participation.

A student can redesign a paper quiz with timed and untimed modes and examine whether both are understandable. The aim is fair participation rather than identical scores.

How mechanical and electrical learning connect

iScore combines physical guidance, powered actuation and buttons. Mechanical study helps examine form and movement; electrical study adds power, controls and signalling.

A student choosing a course should compare daily modules and practical assessments. Being interested in this project does not mean every related ITE course is identical.

Why accurate diagrams matter

A system with multiple stages can confuse teammates if it is unclear which input controls which output. A block diagram can connect button, controller, motor and release action.

Good documentation also identifies what happens when power is lost or an input fails. These are engineering quality questions, not instructions for unsafe experimentation.

What a portfolio should prove

A student portfolio should explain an original task, the learner’s role, feedback, revision and limitations. It should not claim membership in the award-winning team without evidence.

Privacy and consent matter when documenting projects with participants. A modest safe example can demonstrate clearer understanding than an inflated technical claim.

Current programme availability

The iScore team studied under programmes named in the 2026 award profile. ITE’s curriculum and entry pathways may differ for new applicants in 2027.

Use the active course finder to confirm current names, campus and admission criteria instead of assuming that an older Nitec route remains open unchanged.

SEC 2027 and PSE 2028

Singapore’s first Secondary Education Certificate examination is in 2027, with subjects at G1, G2 and G3 levels. MOE plans the common Post-Secondary Admissions Exercise from 2028.

A student applying for a 2027 start using an earlier qualification must follow the existing appropriate exercise. Posting Group alone does not establish eligibility for a named engineering course.

A simple course-comparison table

For each course record the qualification, entry rules, daily practical tasks, assessment and internship arrangement, campus commute and costs, and possible next qualification.

Ask which activities the learner would enjoy repeating rather than choosing by a fashionable term. An award story is a starting point for exploration, not a substitute for personalised admission advice.

A four-week student project

Week one: identify a simple classroom activity that could be easier to access. Week two: sketch alternative controls. Week three: test the instructions with volunteers using paper mock-ups. Week four: revise and document limitations.

The exercise needs no motors or clinical equipment. It demonstrates inclusive problem-solving without claiming to replicate iScore or qualify someone to assess medical needs.

Admissions and official course resources

Deeper guide to accessible play and engineering choices

Accessible design starts before a player reaches the controls

A carnival booth can be difficult to enter even when its game mechanism is thoughtfully adapted. The route from the entrance, queue width, signs and space near the table all affect whether someone can take part. Designers should review the full experience rather than concentrate exclusively on one button.

Students can draw a fictional booth plan with entry and exit paths and list questions about manoeuvring space, readable instructions and access to help. That is a safe starting point for inclusive planning.

Large buttons are helpful only when the surrounding layout works

ITE describes large buttons set at a wheelchair-friendly height. Their intended advantage is making directional input easier to reach for some players. But button location, required pressure, contrast and seating position may still vary in suitability.

A school exercise can compare paper interface sketches from different viewpoints. Ask volunteers what the icons mean and whether they understand left and right immediately. Do not declare a design universally accessible from sketches alone.

Why control force can matter

A button may be physically large yet require a level of force that is uncomfortable or difficult for an individual user. Conversely, a very sensitive control might register accidental inputs. An inclusive interface must consider both purposeful activation and ease of use.

The public iScore profile does not publish measured button-force requirements. Students should identify this as a future testing question instead of inventing a technical figure or assuming every participant will find the controls easy.

Visual instructions should not be the only source of guidance

A game that relies entirely on printed text or visual symbols may be confusing for participants with different communication needs or unfamiliarity with the language used. Accessible designs can consider clear demonstrations, verbal instructions and straightforward iconography.

A volunteer could prepare a plain-language explanation and check that a willing participant understands the goal. The ITE project summary does not specify every supported communication option, so those features are design considerations rather than established iScore capabilities.

The automatic release is a trade-off, not a neutral rule

The 40-second default is intended to help the game progress at a predictable pace. However, a countdown can change how much control a player feels over the activity. Some people may enjoy a time challenge; others may prefer to focus on strategy without a clock.

The manual override described by ITE is a useful example of offering flexibility. A student can test a harmless paper game with and without time pressure and ask how the experience changes.

How an override should be explained

An alternative control is only helpful if players and helpers know when and how it is available. An unfamiliar button or hidden menu may leave a participant believing a fixed rule cannot be changed. Clear communication belongs in the design.

A classroom mock-up can include a visible request-for-more-time option and an explanation of who can use it. This is general design thinking, not a claim that the actual iScore prototype uses a particular button arrangement beyond those published by ITE.

A motorised game requires physical safety review

The prototype uses a motor, rail and solenoid. These moving elements create questions about pinch points, unexpected motion, guards, power isolation and supervision. A successful public demonstration alone cannot establish that every foreseeable fault has been eliminated.

Students should not copy or modify a powered carnival mechanism without qualified guidance. They can learn through high-level diagrams showing inputs, outputs and the need for safe stopping. Safety must be reviewed by appropriate instructors or responsible professionals.

Why error messages matter

If the ball cannot move or a button press is not recognised, the player needs to know what happened. A system that silently fails could frustrate a participant or encourage repeated inputs, while an ambiguous message might imply a personal mistake.

A beginner can prepare fictional screen or sign messages that clearly distinguish ‘system unavailable’ from ‘please try again’. The goal is understandable feedback, not providing repair instructions for the actual device.

The sound and environment of a carnival can affect use

Carnivals can be crowded, noisy and visually busy. A control demonstration that works in a quiet classroom may be harder to follow at a public event. Good design should consider distractions and whether instructions are understandable in the real setting.

A student can imagine two contexts, a calm school room and a busy hall, and list what would need to be checked in each. No specific claim about iScore’s noise performance is established in the public award profile.

Fair play does not require identical physical actions

Players can compete toward a shared objective while using different accessible controls. That can make a recreational activity more welcoming without requiring everyone to move in exactly the same way. Whether scores are comparable is a separate design question.

A student could propose two versions of a paper target game and explain what counts as success in each. If different controls change the difficulty, a designer should address that openly rather than pretend the experience is perfectly equivalent.

Cerebral palsy varies among individuals

A diagnosis does not tell a designer exactly how a person wants to play, which movement feels comfortable or what support is appropriate. People with cerebral palsy may use different mobility aids and communication methods, and some may not want an adapted game at all.

Use respectful language that describes a barrier and a possible alternative, not a universal deficiency. A future design evaluation should involve relevant users with consent and appropriate expertise.

Participation should always remain voluntary

An inclusive event should offer opportunities without making a participant feel obliged to demonstrate an ability in public. A person may choose a conventional game, an adapted version or no game. Those decisions deserve respect.

A student can write a fictional welcome script offering choices without making assumptions about disability. This exercise teaches service etiquette alongside engineering and helps avoid patronising communication.

Avoid treating assistance as failure

Some players may want to use the controls independently while others prefer support from a friend or volunteer. Receiving assistance does not make participation less meaningful. An accessible design should recognise different preferences.

A student evaluating a mock game can ask whether help was offered appropriately and whether the player retained control of choices. Such feedback should be recorded without collecting unnecessary private health information.

What would meaningful user testing look like?

User testing should ask whether people understood the controls, could reach them comfortably, enjoyed the activity and identified any remaining barriers. Technical success, such as a motor moving correctly, is only one part of the experience.

The 2025 carnival showcase is useful context, but the ITE award profile does not publish a standardised user study or full dataset. Do not invent satisfaction percentages or a verified independence score.

Why a single demonstration is not enough for reliability claims

A prototype that works well at one event may still need repeated testing for wear, transport damage, different users and changing environments. Components such as buttons, rails and electrical connections are subject to mechanical and operational stresses.

Students can write a proposed maintenance-question checklist without touching the equipment. A product intended for repeated community use should have appropriate professional inspections before being deployed more widely.

Plywood, portability and stability

ITE’s description identifies plywood and modular components as part of the design. They can support a structure that is movable between settings, but transporting a powered game creates questions about assembly and stable positioning.

A school learner can compare the concepts of modularity and one-piece construction on paper. Actual structural performance and electrical safety require testing that is not documented in the public award summary.

Why a ball’s movement must be predictable

The ball is central to the playing experience, so inconsistency in its movement can affect a user’s sense of control and fairness. A motor-assisted guide should support understandable cause and effect between an input and an outcome.

The public ITE profile does not give positioning accuracy or failure-rate data. Students can think conceptually about repeatability, while recognising that product-specific engineering conclusions need measured results.

Connecting mechatronics to ordinary school subjects

The project connects secondary Mathematics, Physics, Computing and Design & Technology concepts. Motion, timing, electricity, measurements and user instructions all become relevant when an electrical input produces controlled mechanical movement.

A student does not need to purchase a motor to explore the principles. A labelled block diagram and a safe simulated logic exercise can demonstrate how ideas from different subjects fit together.

What mechanical engineering contributes

Mechanical study helps answer questions about motion, materials, guides, dimensions and how a structure behaves during repeated use. A ball-positioning mechanism provides an understandable example of a physical system with several moving parts.

A learner who enjoys making and revising tangible objects may prefer this aspect of the project. They should compare current ITE modules rather than assume every mechanical programme is centred on game design.

What electrical engineering contributes

Electrical systems connect controls, power, actuators and any feedback used by the game. Students must learn safe methods for working with circuits, documenting connections and understanding the limits of their equipment.

A young applicant might find the control side more appealing than the physical structure. The relevant ITE course finder can show whether the programme emphasises electrical theory, electronics testing, maintenance or another specialisation.

What programming contributes

Even a simple game may need logic describing what happens when buttons are pressed, when a release can occur and how the system responds to an error. A small state diagram can make that logic easier to explain.

Students can practise using school-approved simulation software without connecting real motors. They should record which cases they tested and avoid presenting copied code as independently developed work.

Why teams need shared diagrams

An interdisciplinary team can disagree about whether a problem begins in the physical mechanism or the control logic. A shared diagram and test record help people communicate evidence instead of assigning blame.

A beginner group project can document one problem, each person’s observation and the final change made. Honest attribution and written decisions make the project easier to understand later.

How to think about the user journey

A visitor arrives, hears the rules, chooses to play, uses the controls, receives a result and leaves. A design failure at any stage can reduce the overall experience, even if the motor and ball work correctly.

A school team can map this fictional sequence and ask which moments require clearer signs or volunteer assistance. The objective is to reduce unnecessary barriers, not to require every player to have an identical experience.

What a volunteer should say

A respectful introduction focuses on how to play and what options are available, without announcing assumptions about the person’s abilities. The volunteer should listen to requests and avoid touching someone’s mobility equipment without permission.

Students can practise a concise welcome script and ask whether it feels clear and courteous. This communication skill is useful in hospitality, education, community service and accessible event planning.

How feedback could improve later versions

A participant may find the buttons clear but the score display confusing, or the time limit stressful but the movement enjoyable. A design team should separate these observations rather than conclude that the whole project succeeded or failed from one comment.

A useful feedback log identifies the issue, the suggested change and what evidence would be required before implementing it. Personal details should not be collected unnecessarily.

The value of the 2025 Singtel showcase

The earlier public demonstration allowed the project to be described beyond a classroom idea. ITE says it was received positively, but the project profile is not a full account of every interaction or accessibility outcome.

The responsible report preserves the 2025 date and avoids claiming a permanent installation. Future milestones should be added only when an original public source establishes them.

Why a second award does not imply a second product

The 2025 Inclusive Hackathon result and the 2026 Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award refer to the iScore project. Two recognitions can reflect development and continuing value without proving a newly released commercial version.

When writing an education-news article, record the event name and year separately. This prevents accidental duplication or exaggeration of what the student team achieved.

How to compare iScore with other care-related innovations

ITE College East also recognised GripAssist, a prototype support handle intended for bed transfers. That is different from a recreational carnival device, even though both involve movement and user-centred engineering.

Each project has its own risks and evidence requirements. A leisure game must not be described as rehabilitation treatment, and a load-bearing assistive handle must not be treated as a toy.

An award is not clinical validation

The Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award recognises technical innovation and potential value. It is not a clinical trial, regulatory authorisation or an independent guarantee of suitability for every user.

A student can describe iScore as a design intended to broaden access to play. Claims about treatment, measurable motor improvement or universal device safety would need different evidence.

Why a student should review current course titles

The team members studied under Nitec Mechanical Technology and Higher Nitec Mechanical and Electrical Engineering routes. These describe historical educational backgrounds, not necessarily the full set of current options for a 2027 applicant.

Check the official ITE course finder for qualifications, duration, campuses and actual entry conditions. The award profile should inspire interest rather than replace admissions advice.

A family course-comparison plan

Compare two real engineering courses by their entry criteria, practical modules, campus travel, cost, assessments and possible next study or employment. A learner may love physical design but prefer it to programming, or enjoy coding but dislike workshop tasks.

The best choice is grounded in the work someone is willing to practise repeatedly. A project prize is useful context, not a ranking of the schools.

A short original accessibility project for students

Choose a harmless school task such as selecting a quiz answer. Develop two ways for a person to make a choice, test the instructions using paper mock-ups and record feedback on what could be improved.

This exercise involves no powered equipment and no need to ask participants to disclose diagnoses. It develops empathy, systems thinking and honest evaluation without pretending to recreate iScore.

Further updates should use new evidence

A future article could report a documented community deployment, independently evaluated user testing or a revised version of iScore. It should identify the new date and source rather than recycling the 2026 award as fresh news.

Until a later milestone is confirmed, the verified record remains the 2025 hackathon and carnival demonstration and the 19 May 2026 ITE Technology Award.

How to tell accessible participation from a medical claim

An activity that allows more people to choose how to play can be worthwhile without being a form of therapy. Recreation has its own goals: enjoyment, social interaction, choice and a meaningful challenge. Claims about improving muscle strength or neurological function would require separate professional evidence.

When writing about iScore, the careful statement is that it was designed to reduce specific barriers to a carnival game. That is a legitimate innovation goal and does not need exaggerated clinical language to be valuable.

How a student should interpret two awards in two years

The project’s first-place Inclusive Hackathon recognition took place in 2025, followed by the Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award in May 2026. A timeline lets readers understand that the team received recognition at different stages rather than treating two awards as an entirely new product each time.

Students can practise source checking by recording the award name, organisers, date, project and supporting document in separate columns. Clear chronology is especially useful when earlier news previews are later repeated on social media.

Practical questions for a 2027 engineering applicant

Before applying, identify whether the student’s real interest is mechanical movement, electrical controls, programming or user-centred design. Compare the named Higher Nitec courses and their first-year modules, minimum entry qualifications, campus, course duration and supervised workshop responsibilities.

Bring a short list of questions to ITE rather than assuming the iScore team represents the standard experience of every engineering student. A suitable course is one whose daily learning tasks match the learner’s goals and capabilities.

Why a user-centred project needs a limitations section

An award profile can highlight what worked without publishing every unresolved problem. A complete student portfolio should identify potential issues such as different reaching distances, unclear instructions, component wear, unexpected movement and the limited group of users consulted.

Listing those questions does not diminish an innovation. It shows an engineering team can separate the idea’s promise from the evidence still needed before wider public deployment.

Frequently asked questions

What is iScore?

An inclusive motor-assisted version of a traditional carnival ball game.

Which college built it?

ITE College East.

Who led the team?

Ong Di Jing Roger.

Who else participated?

Nur Serianni Binte Muhammad Rossuandi, Muhammad Al Aqmal Iqram Bin Abdul Kader, Kwek Kai Le Terance and Lee Yee Meng.

Which prize did it win in 2026?

The Lee Kuan Yew Technology Award at ITE’s Student Achievers’ Awards.

Was there an award in 2025?

Yes, first place at the Singtel × LionsForge Inclusive Hackathon.

What controls does it use?

Large left-right buttons controlling a motor-assisted ball guide.

What is the 40-second mechanism?

An automatic ball release with a manual override for additional time.

Does it serve people with cerebral palsy?

It was designed to reduce access barriers for people with limited motor control, including some with cerebral palsy.

Is it certified for every user?

The public source does not establish a universal accessibility or clinical certification.

Is it a medical treatment?

No. It is described as an inclusive recreational game.

Where should an applicant check 2027 ITE courses?

The active ITE course finder and admissions exercise.

Other eduKateSingapore ITE reporting

Related 2026 ITE Student Innovation Award projects

Editorial note: this article reports public ITE sources and is independent of ITE, Singtel and the named students. It does not claim to have performed clinical research, accessibility certification or an independent safety test. Readers should verify current course details through ITE.