Meritocracy, Inequality and Elitism in Singapore’s Education System: An Essay
The following short essay provides an insight into issues of inequality within the nation’s meritocratic education system.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has repeatedly stated that Singapore’s only natural resources are her people. As a result, the only way to sustain an optimal economic performance and political leadership in an environment characterised by vulnerability and openness will be through meritocracy (Tan, 2008). Though meritocracy is based solely on academic abilities, critics have highlighted that it is also a practice that “ignores and even conceals” the pros and cons that are unequally distributed to the society (Tan, 2008).
This essay will highlight how inequalities through meritocracy in practice leads to social segregation which brings to the rise of the elites and hence limits the social mobility of the society. Besides that, this essay will also look into what education can do to tackle them especially in Singapore’s context.
As Tan (2008) highlighted, “meritocracy is often an ideology of inequality” (p.9). There will always be a glass ceiling for certain segments of society. The rich will advance to the top faster while the poor may need extra efforts or worse, may never be able to reach the peak. Hayes (2012) mentioned that the playing field is now uneven. Lim (2013) pointed out that elite schools in Singapore are dominated by the rich and those who come from English-speaking homes. Hence, people who are rich will be able to translate their resources and wealth into a semblance of merit when in the first place, merit may not present in the child. This is evident with the availability of tuition where families spend a lot of money to ensure that their children gets a supplementary education in addition to mainstream schooling (Gooch, 2012). When parents send their children to such extra classes, this will give them an added advantage, as compared to others who may not afford to attend. Senior Minister of State for Education and Law, Indranee Rajah, pointed out that education will be important for social mobility and that it will be a problem if tuition is the only way for one to excel in the examinations (Mokhtar, 2013). Therefore, there will not be a level playing ground for everyone because of the different starting point that everyone begins with hence creating an inequality amongst the members of the society.
These resources that are pumped into the students to help them in their academic excellence gives them an opportunity to rise into an elite. Hayes (2012) highlighted that meritocracy produces an increasingly detached elite. This is evident with students as young as nine years old being streamlined into an elite programme. The Gifted Education Program (GEP) is such an example. It is with the assumption that students who undertake this program will prepare them for the responsibilities of being a future leader as well as to provide their service to the nation (MOE, 2011). Despite of their young age, these students are being segregated and put together with people of similar socio-economic status. This can be inferred through a response by the education ministry where 40% of students in the top primary schools live in HDB flats as compared to 80% of students from other primary schools (MOE, 2012a). This trend could be worrying as it might lead to the formation of an elite class. A further example would be on the Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools. SAP schools was introduced in 1979 to “preserve the best traditions and ethos of the old Chinese medium schools” (MOE, 2008). Despite Singapore being a multiracial and multicultural society, the availability of SAP schools may signal an emphasis on the importance of Chinese as well as the idea of racial segregation therefore, these students may not get a chance to mix with others from the other ethnicities. This may in a way, lead them to form an elite class of their own.
The practice of meritocracy itself equates a person’s self-worth with merit. Just because a student is able to sit and excel a written examination doesn’t make him or her qualified to be contributors in the society. For example, the Singapore Sports School and the School of the Arts (SOTA) were introduced to “better cater to the spread and talent preferences over the years” (MOE, 2012: p. 26). Students are being developed in other areas beyond their academic qualifications such as the sports and the arts. However, these talents and abilities are not well developed from the start. Students are still required to perform well in their examinations to be granted admissions into the school. In addition, students who may possess different talents and abilities are not given an opportunity to develop them as early as they could as the education system does not allow them to. For example, if a student has a flair in cooking, besides taking up the subject of Home Economics leading them up to O’ Levels, they are not given a chance to explore their talent as early as how the academic subjects were given priority.
Acknowledging that more can be done within the education system to address the inequalities and the problems due to social mobility, the Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) was introduced in 2009 to emphasise more on the development of life skills and values to ensure that pupils are well prepared for the future (MOE, 2009). This is also in-line with what Minister Heng Swee Keat mentioned during his Work Plan Seminar speech in 2011. He mentioned that one of the three broad areas of focus would be on a Student-centric education whereby all students will be able to succeed (MOE, 2011a). If this is the case, students from different social backgrounds will be given an equal opportunity to achieve educational success. Similarly, to address the issues of polytechnics and ITE being the less feasible option for students who could not make into Junior Colleges, the Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review (ASPIRE) was launched as a signal to look beyond one’s academic qualifications and leverage on building and developing skills (MOE, 2014).
Another area that education can focus on would be on values education. In a similar seminar, Minister Heng also explained that values must be at the centre of the education system (MOE, 2011a). This is introduced as a Values In Action (VIA) programme. In this programme, students, regardless of their social status, will contribute to the society through the learning and application of values, knowledge and skills (MOE, 2014a). When students are involved in projects involving communities that are less privileged, there will be appreciation towards different people. Stenger (2013) reported that such community service projects will teach them more about themselves and gain a sense of connection to the community. Hence, this will reduce the effect of social segregation amongst students and for students to appreciate their community more.
Despite arguments against meritocracy, there are also arguments for the practice of meritocracy. One of which would be its efficiency, as pointed out by Hayes (2012). There are complex jobs around and these jobs should be given to the right person who has the capabilities to do them and do them well (Hayes, 2012). Hence, these people who excel in what they do best should be trained and be put on the job. Even Lee Kuan Yew pointed out that it is important to make sure that those in the top of the society has the characteristics to lead and give the people the inspiration and the drive to make it succeed (Barr, 2000: p.106). Education helps to segregate people with the various structures in place such as the GEP and with the availability of elite schools. However, the true form of meritocracy is such that there will be people who will be more advantageous than others as mentioned above. There will be bound to be students who have the means to make merit available even though it may not be present in the first place. There will always be inequality but the discourse right now surrounds the idea that the practice of meritocracy can be better done to ensure that it is advantageous for the society, regardless of social mobility.
In principle, meritocracy is a good system to ensure that deserving members of the society will be able to rise up and contribute. However, what the principle advocates to do has to go hand-in-hand with what the practice on the ground is. Education, as the main stepping stone in developing nation’s brightest, should be structured in such a way that it allows for a rise in social mobility. In addition, the inequalities present should be based on the true merit of a student instead of additional factors such as private tuition that may put the student at an advantage.
Hafiz graduated with both a Diploma in Education (Credit) and Bachelor of Arts in Education (Hons). His interests include: 1) Neo-liberalism in education, 2) Education system and policies, and 3) Linguistics issues. He has written a paper on “Criteria primary school teachers use when selecting dictionary for their classrooms” as part of his final year thesis.
