Essay Draft 3

Social Consequences of Income Inequality on Education in Singapore

Singapore is an open and small country with a Gini coefficient of 0.478 as of 2012, higher than neighboring countries (Ngerng, 2013). The issue of income inequality is one that brings much unhappiness and tension towards society and would affect any country politically, economically and socially if not handled well.  As mentioned by Goldin (2009) in his TED talk, globalization is not inclusive, and income inequality is worsening. Ashdown (2011) has also identified that wealth has been concentrated in a minority in recent years making the disparity between the high-income earners and the low-income earners bigger than ever before. Thus, with an increasing income gap between the top income earners and low income earners, social impacts on educational opportunities and social mobility within the society is greater than ever before. The Singapore government should not only focus on financial aid, but instead give attention to equalizing educational opportunities to keep social mobility up.

However, in Singapore, because educational opportunities are not equalized, they tend to benefit the rich who are more influential and have more networks. These would indirectly affect a child’s chances of being accepted into a better endowed primary school and impact the child’s subsequent academic performance (Edweb). For example, the admission criteria of primary schools mostly come with the efforts of parents’ contributions to the school. This includes alumni involvement, regular parent volunteering and recommendations from an active community service leader or church organization directly linked to the school. This clearly gives the rich more advantages to enroll their children into better or more popular schools, giving them a better head-start into their education journey while widening the gap of educational achievements (Wells, 2005, p. 11).

As shown in Table 1 (Minstry of Education, 2013), phase 2B, parents have to rely on volunteering their services to the school or connections with community service leaders. Even though this may encourage parents to play a more active role in serving the community, this would generally motivate the parents who can afford to spend their time on these activities. Singapore, being one of the most expensive cities in the world (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2014), has a high cost of living. Most low-income families would have both parents working in order to cope with the high and rising cost. Thus, the time spent at work will reduce the amount of time to participate in such activities.

Eligibility	Primary One Registration Phase
For children who are Singapore Citizens or Singapore Permanent Residents	Phase 1 For a child who has a sibling studying in the primary school of choice
	Phase 2A (1) (a) For a child whose parent is a former student of the primary school and who has joined the alumni association as a member not later than 30 June 2012. (b) For a child whose parent is a member of the School Advisory / Management Committee
	Phase 2A (2) (a) For a child whose parent or sibling has studied in the primary school of choice (b) For a child whose parent is a staff member of the primary school of choice
	Phase 2B (a) For a child whose parent has joined the primary school as a parent volunteer not later than 1 July 2012 and has given at least 40 hours of voluntary service to the school by 30 June 2013 (b) For a child whose parent is a member endorsed by the church/clan directly connected with the primary school (c) For a child whose parent is endorsed as an active community leader
	Phase 2C For all children who are eligible for Primary One in the following year and are not yet registered in a primary school
	Phase 2C Supplementary For a child who is not yet registered in a school after Phase 2C

Table 1: Registration Phases and Procedures

As we are moving towards a fair and inclusive society where all schools are good schools, we need to improve on the current system and give all students an equal chance to enroll in their ideal school regardless of their parents’ socio-economic status.

The Straits Times (2013) has reported that the government has decided to make the system fairer by reserving 40 seats and dividing it fairly between phase 2B and 2C for students with no prior connections. This is a slight improvement from the previous system where no concession was given, and it would ensure that 20 places be available for balloting giving more opportunities for those who have no connections. This helps to ensure that popular primary schools with good performance records in the “Primary School Leaving Examination” (PSLE) are not kept within the elites or the rich who are able to secure places through alumni involvement or regular volunteering.

Even though the 40 places may prove to be good in assuring a more impartial way of selection, the rich would still be able to use the balloting criteria or put more commitment into these alumni activities in order to gain priority to get their children through the system in phase 2B. Also, Phase 2B offers a religion organization endorsement as criteria, if the school is connected to a clan, putting priority of some religion over others, which goes against Singapore’s main values of equality. This should not be the case, especially when primary school education is compulsory under Singapore’s laws (Minstry of Education, 2000).

In this context, I would like to suggest removing phase 2B completely, removing alumni connection or parent volunteering. There are always other measures in order to get parents involved in a child’s education journey, without having to place them as admission advantages. This would help to ensure that all schools receive a random distribution of students. The different abilities of students will increase the dynamics among students and enriches the school’s culture, moving closer to a Singapore where all schools are good schools. More importantly, this will help to equalize educational opportunities and the lower income group will not be denied a chance to enter a school with better academic performance.

Although this suggested solution may be tough to implement in the short-run as it would bring about much disapproval from the rich and influential, thus this solution may only be achieved in the long-run. Giving all students an equal starting point is crucial to ensure that social mobility is up and equally accessed by anyone regardless of their background. Only with fair opportunities, will there be healthy competition in the economy.

[850 words]

Works Cited

Ashdown, P. (December, 2011). The Global Power Shift. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/paddy_ashdown_the_global_power_shift.html?source=facebook#.Uvj0BmChr9I.facebook

Edweb. (n.d.). Edweb. Retrieved from The Walls Speak: The Interplay of Quality Facilities, School Climate, and : http://edweb.sdsu.edu/schoolhouse/documents/wallsspeak.pdf

Goldwin, I. (July, 2009). Navigating our global future. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future?language=en

Minstry of Education. (2000). Compulsory Education. Retrieved from Minstry of Education: http://www.moe.edu.sg/initiatives/compulsory-education/

Minstry of Education. (2013). Registration Phases and Procedures. [Table] Retrived from http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admissions/primary-one-registration/phases/

Ngerng, R. (21 Feburary , 2013). The Heart Truths. Retrieved from http://thehearttruths.com/2013/02/21/singapore-has-the-highest-income-inequality-compared-to-the-oecd-countries/

Straits Times. (19 August, 2013). 40 places in every primary school reserved in phase 2B and 2C from 2014: MOE. The Straits Times. Retrieved from: http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/40-places-every-primary-school-reserved-phase-2b-and-2c-2014-moe-20130

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2014). Worldwide Cost of Living 2014 survey. Retrieved from The Economist Intelligence Unit: http://www.todayonline.com/business/singapore-now-worlds-most-expensive-city-economist

Wells, R. (2005). Education’s Effect on Income Inequality: A Further Look. Los Angeles: California Center for Population Research. Retrieved from http://www.ccpr.ucla.edu/publications/conference-proceedings/CP-05-054.pdf

­

Essay Draft 2

What are the social consequences of income inequality on education in Singapore? 

Singapore is an open and small economy with a Gini coefficient of 0.478 as of 2012 higher than neighboring countries (Ngerng, 2013). The issue about income inequality is that it brings much unhappiness and tension towards society and would affect any country politically, economically and socially if not handled well.  As mentioned by Goldwin (2009) in his TED talk, globalization is not inclusive and income inequality is worsening. Ashdown (2011) has also identified that wealth has been concentrated on a few minority in recent years making the disparity between the high income earners and the low income earners bigger than ever before. Thus, with an increasing income gap between the top income earners and low income earners, social impacts on educational opportunities and social mobility within the society is greater than ever before. 

The government should not only focus solely on financial aid, instead more attention should be given to equalizing educational opportunities to keep social mobility up.

However, in Singapore, educational opportunities are not equalized and would benefit the rich who are more influential and have more connections. This would indirectly affect a child’s chance of being accepted into a better endowed primary school and therefore the child’s subsequent academic performance. (Edweb) For example, in the admission criteria of primary schools mostly come with the efforts of parents’ contribution to the school. This includes alumni involvement, regular parent volunteering and recommendation from an active community service leader or church organization directly linked to the school. This clearly gives the rich more advantage to enroll their children into better or more popular schools giving them a better head-start into their education journey widening the gap of educational achievements (Wells, 2005, p. 11).

Eligibility	Primary One Registration Phase
For children who are Singapore Citizens or Singapore Permanent Residents	Phase 1 For a child who has a sibling studying in the primary school of choice
	Phase 2A (1) (a) For a child whose parent is a former student of the primary school and who has joined the alumni association as a member not later than 30 June 2012. (b) For a child whose parent is a member of the School Advisory / Management Committee
	Phase 2A (2) (a) For a child whose parent or sibling has studied in the primary school of choice (b) For a child whose parent is a staff member of the primary school of choice
	Phase 2B (a) For a child whose parent has joined the primary school as a parent volunteer not later than 1 July 2012 and has given at least 40 hours of voluntary service to the school by 30 June 2013 (b) For a child whose parent is a member endorsed by the church/clan directly connected with the primary school (c) For a child whose parent is endorsed as an active community leader
	Phase 2C For all children who are eligible for Primary One in the following year and are not yet registered in a primary school
	Phase 2C Supplementary For a child who is not yet registered in a school after Phase 2C

Table 1: Registration Phases and Procedures

As seen in Table 1 (Minstry of Education, 2013), phase 2B, parents have to rely on volunteering their services to the school or connections with community service leaders. Even though this may encourage parents to play a more active role in serving the community, but this would generally motivate the parents who can afford to spend their time on these activities. Singapore, being one of the most expensive cities in the world (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2014), has a high cost of living. Most low-income families would have both parents working in order to cope with the high and rising cost. Thus, the time spent at work will reduce the amount of time to participate in such activities.

As we are moving towards a fair and inclusive society where all schools are good schools, we need to improve on the current system, and give all students an equal chance to enroll in their ideal school regardless of their parents’ socio-economic status.

As of 2014, the government has decided to make the system fairer by reserving 40 seats and dividing it fairly between phase 2B and 2C for students with no prior connections (Straits Times, 2013). This is a slight improvement from the previous system where no concession was given, and would ensure that 20 places will be available for balloting giving more opportunities for those who has no connections. This helps to ensure that popular primary schools with good performance records in the “Primary School Leaving Examination” (PSLE) are not kept within the elites or the rich who is able to secure places through alumni involvement or regular volunteering.

Even though the 40 places may prove to be good in assuring a more impartial way of selection, the rich would still be able to use the balloting criteria or put more commitment into the alumni in order to gain priority to get their children through the system in phase 2B. Also, Phase 2B offers a religion organization endorsement as criteria, if the school is connected to a clan, putting priority of some religion over others, this goes against Singapore’s main values of equality. This should not be the case especially when primary school education is compulsory under Singapore’s laws. (Minstry of Education, 2000)

Hence, I would like to suggest removing phase 2B completely, removing alumni connection or parent volunteering. There are always other measures in order to get parents involved in a child’s education journey, without having to place them as admission advantages. This would help to ensure that all schools will receive a random distribution of students. The different abilities of students will increase the dynamics among students and enriches the school’s culture, moving closer to a Singapore where all schools are good schools. More importantly, this will help to equalize educational opportunities and the lower income group will not be denied a chance to enter a school with better academic performance.

Although this may be tough to implement in the short-run as it will bring about much disapproval from the rich and influential, thus this can only be achieved in the long-run. Giving all students an equal starting point is crucial to ensure that social mobility is up and equally accessed by anyone regardless of their background. Only with fair opportunities, will there be healthy competition in the economy.

[833 words]

Works Cited

Ashdown, P. (December, 2011). The Global Power Shift. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/paddy_ashdown_the_global_power_shift.html?source=facebook#.Uvj0BmChr9I.facebook

Edweb. (n.d.). Edweb. Retrieved from The Walls Speak: The Interplay of Quality Facilities, School Climate, and : http://edweb.sdsu.edu/schoolhouse/documents/wallsspeak.pdf

Goldwin, I. (July, 2009). Navigating our global future. [Video] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future?language=en

Minstry of Education. (2000). Compulsory Education. Retrieved from Minstry of Education: http://www.moe.edu.sg/initiatives/compulsory-education/

Minstry of Education. (2013). Registration Phases and Procedures. [Table] Retrived from http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admissions/primary-one-registration/phases/

Ngerng, R. (21 Feburary , 2013). The Heart Truths. Retrieved from http://thehearttruths.com/2013/02/21/singapore-has-the-highest-income-inequality-compared-to-the-oecd-countries/

Straits Times. (19 August, 2013). 40 places in every primary school reserved in phase 2B and 2C from 2014: MOE. Retrieved from Straits Times: http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/40-places-every-primary-school-reserved-phase-2b-and-2c-2014-moe-20130

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2014). Worldwide Cost of Living 2014 survey. Retrieved from The Economist Intelligence Unit: http://www.todayonline.com/business/singapore-now-worlds-most-expensive-city-economist

Wells, R. (2005). Education’s Effect on Income Inequality: A Further Look. Los Angeles: California Center for Population Research. Retrieved from http://www.ccpr.ucla.edu/publications/conference-proceedings/CP-05-054.pdf

­

Reader Response Final

In the article of "Globalisation of Culture through the Media", Kraidy (2002) has evaluated the highly debated issue of cultural imperialism and its alternatives. He mentions the debate about whether the West is unfairly imposing its culture on developing countries through the media. The flow of news and entertainment was biased in favor of developed countries due to the unequal technology level between the developed and the developing countries which intensifies the debate. The author also states that globalisation is seen to be a better alternative than cultural imperialism as it depicts the ever-changing complex environment, which includes the idea that different global stakeholders may weaken an individual nation’s cultural unity.

Kraidy(2002) discusses the different views of how free flow of information is more advantageous to the Western countries. This is mainly due to the difference in the levels of technology and experiences that the developed countries have as compared to the developing countries. For example, in the film-making industries, there have been clearly more attention given to movies produced by big companies such as Disney, Pixar and Fox. Also, Hollywood stars are more well-known globally as compared to national stars in China or Singapore. This is because these companies had a head-start in terms of technology in animation and Hollywood had a relatively longer history as compared to Bollywood. With the promotion of free flow of information, this would only be advantageous to the global companies who are already monopolizing the global markets. This makes it difficult for smaller firms to break into the market and difficult to compete with the global firms with more funding and lower cost. This would thus help to extend the developed countries’ influences further to other developing countries. However, I beg to differ.

With the increased flow of information, Asian culture would also be able to extend its influence and be encouraged in the West instead. Successful Asian film classics such as Akira and Godzilla have been adapted and remade in the Western film-making scene. This may in turn help promote and strengthen Asian culture on a long-term basis. With the distinctive and rich culture of Asian countries, this brings about more interest that global firms have towards the Asian countries. This may even cause Western countries to invest in such cultures promoting Asian values such as Disney movie Mulan. Therefore, it is one-sided to think that the free flow of information would only help expand the West’s influence on developing countries. 

Reference:

Kraidy, M. M. (2002). Globalization Through the Media. Retrieved from

http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1333&context=asc_papers 

Essay (Draft1)

Essay Draft

Singapore is an open and small economy with a Gini coefficient higher than neighboring countries (0.478 as of 2012)*. The issue about income inequality is that it brings much unhappiness and tension towards society and would affect any country politically, economically and socially if not handled well. Also, as reference to the TED video that Godwin mentioned, with globalization, wealth is starting to concentrate on a minority few making the disparity between the high income earners and the low income earners bigger than ever before. Thus, with an increasing income gap between the top income earners and low income earners, social impacts on educational opportunities and social mobility within the society is greater than ever before. The government should not only focus solely on financial aid, more attention should be given to equalizing educational opportunities to keep social mobility up.

However, in Singapore, educational opportunities are not equalized and would benefit the rich who have more connections affecting a child’s chances of being accepted into a school and the child’s performance due to the environment.* For example, in the admission criteria of students into primary schools mostly comes with the efforts of the parent’s contribution to the school. This includes alumni involvement, regular parent volunteering and recommendation from an active community service leader or church organization directly linked from the school. This clearly give the rich more advantage to get their children into better or more popular schools giving them a better head-start into their education journey.

Eligibility	Primary One Registration Phase	Registration Dates
For children who are Singapore Citizens or Singapore Permanent Residents	Phase 1 For a child who has a sibling studying in the primary school of choice	Thursday, 4 July 2013 Friday, 5 July 2013
	Phase 2A(1) (a) For a child whose parent is a former student of the primary school and who has joined the alumni association as a member not later than 30 June 2012. (b) For a child whose parent is a member of the School Advisory / Management Committee Announcement of Results: Thursday, 11 July 2013	Tuesday, 9 July 2013
	Phase 2A(2) (a) For a child whose parent or sibling has studied in the primary school of choice (b) For a child whose parent is a staff member of the primary school of choice Announcement of Results: Thursday, 18 July 2013	Monday, 15 July 2013 Tuesday, 16 July 2013
	Phase 2B (a) For a child whose parent has joined the primary school as a parent volunteer not later than 1 July 2012 and has given at least 40 hours of voluntary service to the school by 30 June 2013 (b) For a child whose parent is a member endorsed by the church/clan directly connected with the primary school (c) For a child whose parent is endorsed as an active community leader Announcement of Results: Friday, 26 July 2013	Monday, 22 July 2013 Tuesday, 23 July 2013
	Phase 2C For all children who are eligible for Primary One in the following year and are not yet registered in a primary school Announcement of Results: Tuesday, 6 August 2013	Tuesday, 30 July 2013 Wednesday, 31 July 2013 Thursday, 1 August 2013
	Phase 2C Supplementary For a child who is not yet registered in a school after Phase 2C Announcement of Results: Tuesday, 20 August 2013	Tuesday, 13 August 2013 Wednesday, 14 August 2013
For children who are not Singapore Citizens or Singapore Permanent Residents1	Phase 3 For a child who is neither a Singapore Citizen nor a Singapore Permanent Resident Announcement of Results: Friday, 30 August 2013	Thursday, 29 August 2013

(Taken from http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/admissions/primary-one-registration/phases/) 

As seen in 2B, the parent has to rely on volunteering their service to the school, religious contacts and connections with community service leaders. Even though this may encourage parents to take part in the child’s education journey and play a more active role in serving the community, this would generally motivate the parents who can afford to spend their time on these activities. Singapore, being one of the most expensive cities in Asia, naturally has a high cost of living. Most low-income families would have both parents working in order to cope with the high cost of living. Thus, the time spent at work will reduce the amount of time to participate such activities.

As we are moving towards a fair society where all schools are good schools, we need to improve on the currents system in place, and give all students a fair and more equal chance regardless of their parents’ socio-economic status.

As of 2014, the government has decided to make the system fairer by reserving 40 seats (split fairly between phase 2B and 2C) for students with no prior connections through the alumni or without a sibling being in the same school. With no criteria attached to these reserved places, this allows a random selection of students with no background limitations. This is a slight improvement from the previous system where no concession was given, and would definitely ensure that there would be 20 places available for balloting giving more opportunities for those who has no connections of such kind. This helps to ensure those popular primary schools with good performance records in the “Primary School Leaving Examination” (PSLE) are not kept within the elites or the rich who is able to secure places through alumni involvement or regular volunteering with the school.

Even though the 40 places may be reserved and prove to be good in assuring a more just way of selection, the rich would still be able to use the balloting criteria or put more commitment into the alumni in order to gain priority to get their children through the system in phase 2B. Also, Phase 2B requires a religion organization endorsement, if the school is connected to a church or clan, puts priority of some religions over others, this goes against Singapore’s main values of equality regardless of race and religion. This should not be the case especially when primary school education is compulsory under Singapore’s laws.*

Hence, I would like to suggest of removing phase 2B completely, doing away with alumni connections or parent volunteering. There are always other measures in order to get parents involved in a child’s education journey, without having to place them as an admission advantage. This would help ensure that all schools will receive a random distribution of students with differing abilities and capabilities helping all schools to increase its dynamics and enriching the school’s culture.

Although this may be tough to implement in the short-run, this should be the goal of Singapore’s education system in the long-run. Giving all students an equal starting point is crucial to ensure that social mobility is up and equally accessed by anyone regardless of their background. Only with fair opportunities, will there be healthy competition in the economy striving for improvement.

[809 words]

­

Outline Draft

 Essay Outline

What are the social consequences of income inequality on education in Singapore?

Introduction: Background             - Briefly state the problem: Singapore is an open and small economy with a Gini coefficient higher than neighboring countries (0.478 as of 2012)*. Due to its openness to international free trade, smaller countries are often linked to greater income inequality.* Income inequality indirectly affects a child’s chances of being accepted into a school and the child’s performance based on their parents’ social-economic status.* The rich has more advantage to get their children into better schools giving them a better head-start into their education journey. Then, these children would grow up and attain higher levels of education qualifications and earn higher incomes and the cycle continues.             - Briefly state one solution:  Helping them financially is insufficient but a social policy is required to give everyone an equal chance of entering into schools of their choice. Currently; there are many advantages given to those who stay near the better school with higher chances during balloting. (Phase 2C)* Would suggest improving the system by changing the criteria for a reserved percentage of phase 2C: Instead of home distance, a lottery system* should be used with the initial priority of SC over PR.    Thesis statement: With an increasing income gap between the top income earners and low income earners, social impacts on educational opportunities and social mobility within the society is greater than ever before. The government should not only focus solely on financial aid, more attention should be given to equalizing educational opportunities to keep social mobility up. Body: BRIEFLY describe problem [why is it a problem?]: Talk about the primary school admission scene here and its criteria with the balloting requirement, and elaborate on how this is more advantageous to the rich as compared to the poor. Rich – Higher income per capital, does not require two full time working parent to cope with the cost of living for eg. Able to devote more time as alumni member or as a parent volunteer. Poor – low income earners, unable to change housing location in order to have a more favorable chance to enter the desired primary school. Assuming both parents are working would have no time to offer their time as a parent volunteer as they need to work to support their family. As we are moving towards what the government is trying to build a mindset that all schools are good schools, we need to improve on certain measures taken in order for all schools to intake different portfolio of students from different background. Also, to give all students a more equal chance of entering a school of their choice regardless of their social-economic status. C. Explain and support one solution. 1st Describe ONE existing solution: As of 2014, all primary school would reserve 40 places for students without prior connections.* 2nd EVALUATE its effectiveness (evidence) Explain the benefits of this policy. This is good and beneficial as this would make the system more just and unbiased towards the rich or those that have prior connections. This also makes sure that the places reserved for students 3rd Explain what evidence shows: why effective/not effective in fixing the problem? Think about why the solution may still be a problem. Even though the 40 places may be reserved and prove to be good in assuring a more just way of selection, the rich would still be able to use the balloting criteria to get their children through the system. Especially when the rich can afford to move house in order to have more advantages over the poor. 4th If you can improve on existing solution(s), propose your OWN solution. Think about the context in which your proposed solution can be possible. What steps need to be taken to make the solution(s) work?                          In the US, lottery system has been put in place in order to help reduce the unfairness of the admission of schools.*Improving the system by setting aside a certain percentage for the lottery system would give a more equal chance to everyone. 5th Concluding sentence.