I feel this pervasive sense of monotony even as I type this entry. Life after A levels has not all been that exciting; at least not the hardcore gaming and arcade escapades I have otherwise fantasised it to be. Maybe it is the effect of the medicine, or maybe it is just me. This languorous stew of tedium is driving me crazy. Somehow it rhymes. Lol.

Anyway, this entry is not about me whining, but more on an article published by Michael D. Barr in the Far Eastern Economic Review on October 2006.

http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/0610/free/p018.html.


The article’s arguments seem rather invalid to me. I have a bone to pick with the premises.

The damned statistics - so what if the Chinese make up a disproportionate percentage of the scholarship holders. It does not mean, hence, that the process is biased. The make up of the scholarship holders tells me nothing more than superficialities. I have yet to see evidence of shady selection processes for scholarships. Preliminary selections are done by teacher recommendations, CCA and examination records, which are all done in black and white. Furthermore, there are aptitude, psychometric tests and interviews. Yes, the integrity of these processes here may still be skewed to favour certain people. The point here though, is that the author has not considered other reasons why the proportions of the races of the scholarship holders are as such, and instead adamantly alleged that bias are prevalent. Other reasons like: the Chinese doing better under the MOE system of education for one reason or another, or that lesser non-Chinese comparatively are interested in a civil service career. Assumptions of homogeneity and proportionality are not quite well argued for here though.

The point about SAP schools - Multi-nationalities are hard to manage (please) in infant nations. SAP schools were not only funded by the government in the early days, but by many rich Chinese entrepreneurs like Tan Kah Kee. Such philanthropists contributed ideas, effort and money to ensure the well being of their respective communities. I am sure the government did not forget the composition of its electorate. The purpose of setting up SAP schools is not to solely propagate the Chinese’s interests at the expense of the non-Chinese. Check out what gives across the Causeway, save for the fact that I hardly think they claim to be meritocratic. The bias over there is overt.

However, I feel that the author has a valid point here though - the only one which I would care to admit, at any rate. However, it is not really about SAP schools privileging Chinese education. Hello, the majority of Singaporeans are Chinese, and SAP schools certainly were not and are not exclusive to the Chinese alone. What the author should have argued for should not be covert discrimination against the non-Chinese, but rather that against the “lesser-elites” who are not able to get into the higher echelons of the society due to the plain lack of opportunities from young. (Wee Shu-Min’s elitist anti-whiner remarks seem particularly poignant to me now.) In other words, the issue here seems to be more of class than that of race. It is more about perpetuating a regenerating class of “persistent elites”. This is because the elites can get into their children into better schools, and their children will thus have a higher chance of receiving better education, and so on and so forth. The difference between class and race here is particularly insidious. It just so happens that a lot of non-Chinese fall under this category of the unfortunate, unfortunately.

The rhetoric of meritocracy is not so well argued for in this article, I feel. The so-called "tremendous biases" may be true. I am not a pro-PAP speaker though. It is just that I should apply what I have learnt in my KI lessons – critical thinking.


12/07/2007 09:13:00 PM

not so innocent
slightly deranged
loved. muahaha. =)

H-er, 06S70
chinese high, hwa chong
ncc, yec, council
cip exco, oac

break; holiday
take SAT
learn driving
get a job

the transition phase sucks

|December 2007|