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