Research Essay Question 4
Who is a Singaporean? How do we reconcile our different ethnic backgrounds, with this overarching identity? How can this relate to the professional of teaching, where diversity is increasingly being subsumed to the needs of globalization on the one hand and cultural inclusivity on the other?
An Overview
To make connections between the parts of the broad question, finer questions for each part to help to clarify and contextualise the definition of key terms and provide greater depth and breadth in the discussion.
The guiding questions:
· What is “Identity” in the Singapore context?
· What is the profile of Singaporeans and how has this shaped the “identity” of a Singaporean?
· In Singapore, how are multiracialism perceived and managed?
· What is the motivation behind Singapore’s national ideology?
· Why is it important for us to bring together the different ethnic groups? What are the underlying risks and challenges the government attempts to manage?
· What is the country’s approach develop and foster the ‘desired’ identity? What are the policies introduced to enforce this ‘new’ identity created?
· In the education institutions, what are the efforts put in and programmes introduced to inculcate the desired mindset in the students?
· What is the definition of “Globalization”?
· What is the impact of globalization to Singapore?
· What complexity (or diversity) has globalization add to a multiracial classroom or society in Singapore?
· How has it change the social fabric in Singapore, hence impact on the classroom profile?
· What does ‘cultural inclusivity’ mean in a Singapore classroom?
· How could the impact of globalization and ‘cultural inclusivity’ change the way the classroom is managed?
· How do the impact of globalization and ‘cultural inclusivity’ change the way educators design the learning experience of the students?
Annex A is an illustration of the relationships between the questions, that when put together attempt to answer the broad question
The Singaporean Identity
Defining “National Identity”
Defined by Smith (1991), “…‘national’ identity involves some sense of political community, however tenuous. A political community in turn implies at least some common institutions and a single code of rights and duties for all the members of the community. It also suggests a definitely social space, a fairly well demarcated and bounded territory, with which the members identify and to which they feel they belong.” (p. 9)
National Identity is multi-dimensional and is built on a collection of identities which include ethnic and religious identity. It is a therefore a social construction characterized by the historical territory, historical memories, common mass public culture as well as a common economy with territorial mobility for members (Smith, 1991, p. 14).
Extending Smith’s concept of National Identity is Stuart Hall’s (1997, p4) description of national identity that can be perceived as a representation:
“Members of the same culture must share sets of concepts, images and ideas which enable them to think and feel about the world, and thus to interpret the world, in roughly similar ways. They must share, broadly speaking, the same ‘cultural codes’. In this sense, thinking and feeling are themselves systems of representation’, in which our concepts, images and emotions ‘stand for’ or represent, in our mental life, things which are or may be ‘out there’ in the world.”
While history dated back to as early as the 14th century, Singapore only started major transformation from a fishing village to a “modern” cosmopolitan Singapore after Sir Stamford Raffles landed on Singapore in 1819. The original inhabitants in the island were largely made up by the Malays from the Malay Peninsula and Archipelago, including the Bugis. Since Raffles’ arrival, Singapore was positioned as a trading post, and eventually grew to become a major port of call for ships plying between Europe and East Asia. This attracted immigrants mainly from the Malay Peninsula, China, the Indian sub-continent and Sri Lanka started to arrive, creating a plural society largely comprising of the Malays, Chinese and Indians in the small island. There were only small percentage made up by the Europeans and Eurasians (who were mainly descendants of Portuguese). To add further diversity, within the Chinese community, immigrants came from different places like Malacca of the Malaya and Fujian, Guangdong and Shantou of China. Similarly, Indian immigrants came from places Penang of Malay as well as Southern India.
The characteristics of national identity described by Smith (1991, p. 14) did not start emerging until after the country gained independence in 1965. Between the post-World War II times and independence, Singapore experienced unrests such as the racial riots, labour disputes and strikes. The government recognised that racial harmony is crucial to the nation building. As highlighted by then Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in the Parliament in 1990, the government’s fear was that a collision between religions or between religion and state would affect harmony here (Singapore). (The Straits Times, 2009, July 24).
Shaping the Singaporean Identity
In nation building, “multi-racialism” is the “ideology that accords equal status to the cultures and ethnic identities of the various ‘races’ that are regarded as comprising the composition of a plural society”. (Leong, 2009, p. 3).
In the Singapore pledge that is cited daily by all schooling children, the importance of maintaining racial harmony in this multiracial country is emphasized:
We, the citizens of Singapore,
Pledge ourselves as one united people,
Regardless of race, language or religion,
To build a democratic society,
Based on justice and equality,
So as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation.
The ideology of multi-racialism is formalized and implemented as policy and national identity through various formalized channels. The key message is communities need to trust each other know what needs to be done to stay united before any crisis strikes.
To-date, strong characteristics of the Singapore identity has yet emerged. In the Country Study by the Library of Congress, Lepoer (1989) reported that “… identity remained somewhat ill-defined, and it often appeared easier to say what Singaporean identity was not than what it was”. A similar observation was reported in the Paper, Nation Branding and National Identity: Desperately Seeking Singapore (IPD, 2006) by the Institute of Policy Development Research Unit, Singapore did not perform as well as other countries known for their national branding in terms of self-image; and it suggested that national confidence and self identity could be two areas that needed to be addressed to.
However, the process resonates what Hall (2006) said about “Culture Identity… is a matter of ‘becoming’ as well as of ‘being’. It belongs to the future as much as to the past. It is not something which already exists, transcending place, time, history and culture.” (p. 224) It is clear that, as a young nation, Singapore is still in the process of developing its national identity and it take time for the unique characteristics to become apparent. While it picks up useful pieces from the history to establish its national identity, it is also responsive to the global changes where new values and characters would emerge.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted in the National Day Rally 2010, “... Singapore Spirit is not based on a common race or language or religion. It is based on deeper things which we share, shared values like multiracialism or meritocracy or respect for every talent; shared loyalty and commitment to Singapore; shared responsibility for each other and pride in what we have done together; shared memories as well as dreams and aspirations. It is the determination that makes us press on when things are tough… the trust that keeps us together when forces try to pull us apart… It is the competence and the quiet pride and discipline that make sure that things go right.... It is a confidence that we will prevail come what may. It is this spirit in each of us which makes Singapore work the way it does and which makes Singaporeans special.” (PMO, 2010)
Reconciling the different ethnic backgrounds
The Singapore identity does not evolve from the on-going social, political and cultural life. Instead, it is consciously created and “built” by policies, directives and educational campaigns (Barbara, 1989).
Plural societies are created as a result of people from diverse cultures, ethnicities, languages and religions come co-exist in the defined territory. The population is broadly classified into four racial groups – Chinese, Malay, India and Others, with the racial composition of Chinese 74.2%, Malay (13.4%), Indian (9.2%) and Others (3.2%). (Singapore Department of Statistics, 2010)
Lessons learnt in the pre-Independence day has helped the Singapore government to recognize that race is a politically sensitive issue, and it is one vulnerable fault line to the country’s stability. Significant amount of effort is channeled to promote strong networks of trust and being commitment to maintain good relationships among the ethnic groups.
The ideology of multi-racialism and its implementation as policy and the building of the national identity could be seen in the following:
(a) Multi-racialism policy
The multi-racialism policy ensures equal treatment for all races. In Singapore, race and religion tend to be conflated (for example, a Malay by birth is also a Muslim). Because of the riots in the past broke out due to insensitivities to race and religion, the government took steps to prevent such from happening.
In the 1987 National Day Rally, then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew warned that religious leaders of the serious repercussions if they use their leadership to take on anything economic or political (Zakir, 2009). This was followed by the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA) that was passed in 1990. The rationale behind this is to prevent the mixing of religion and politics and to prevent those holding religious offices from using religion as a platform to mount political agitation and make inflammatory political speeches.
Then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong reiterated, in his speech in a religious celebration in 1999, “Given how critical talent and racial harmony are to us, we can ill afford to depart from the principle of meritocracy where the most capable person gets the job, and how far a person goes depends solely on his ability and contribution, regardless of his race, language or religion.” (MIA, 1999)
In 2002, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong also mooted the idea of a Code of Religious Harmony. In the same year, the inaugural Racial Harmony Day Event was held in schools. From then, schools commemorate the day on 21st July every year to remind students that social division and race and religion are potential fault-lines in Singapore society. It is also a day for schools to reflect on, and celebrate our success as a harmonious nation and society built on a rich diversity of cultures and heritages.
(b) National Education (NE)
In the Network Conference in 2003, then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said, “NE seeks to provide a common reference point for all Singaporeans. Its objective, at the most basic level, is to tell younger Singaporeans the Singapore Story. This will help deepen their understanding of Singapore’s constraints and vulnerabilities, and imbue them with the values make Singapore tick. Eventually, we hope that Singaporean will develop the right instincts and attitudes, which will help us cope with the new challenges of a different era. By strengthening our shared cultural DNA, we will bond more closely together as one nation.” (Nexus, 2010)
The objective of National Education (NE) is to develop national cohesion, the instinct for survival and confidence in the future through
· Fostering a sense of identity, pride and self-respect as Singaporeans;
· Knowing the Singapore story - how Singapore succeeded against the odds to become a nation;
· Understanding Singapore's unique challenges, constraints and vulnerabilities, which make us different from other countries; and
· Instilling the core values of our way of life, and the will to prevail, that ensures our continued success and well-being.
Indeed, this aligns to the four characteristics of national identity by Smith (1991, p. 14). The desired outcomes of the NE programme are translated into six messages:
· Singapore is our homeland. This is where we belong.
· We must preserve racial and religious harmony.
· We must uphold meritocracy and prevent corruption.
· No one owes Singapore a living.
· We must ourselves defend Singapore.
· We have confidence in the future.
In schools, NE is integrated into both Academic Curriculum and Co-curriculum. While NE does not exist as a curriculum subject, it is infused across subjects in the curriculum, in particular Humanities and Character Education. In co-curriculum, students of different races participate in activities to foster camaraderie and bonding and to develop a sense of belonging to the community. Such activities include the commemoration of Total Defence Day, Racial Harmony Day and the National Day. Students also visit various organizations including the National Heritage Centre and the Battle Box during learning journeys. On top of this, each year, Primary 5 students from all primary schools would get to attend the National Day Parade preview to evoke a sense of patriotism amongst the students and to impart to them the meaning of National Day that marks Singapore’s emergence as an independent country.
Since 1967, before the launch of the NE Programme, the Ministry of Education organizes the Singapore Youth Festival with the primary objective to foster a sense of national identity by bringing youth of different language streams together in the field of sports, the performing arts and uniformed group. (MOE, 2007)
Besides educational institutions, other government agencies also launch NE Programmes for various target groups in the Civil Service and the general population. This includes the NE Seminars organized by the Civil Service College, exhibitions like “Fabric of the Nation” that represented the richness, diversity, colourfulness and strength of a country bound together.
(c) Bilingualism policy
When Mr Lee Kuan Yew became Singapore’s Prime Minister in 1959, he expressed his concern on the consistency in messaging when education was delivered at the respective Mother Tongue languages (that is, Chinese, Malay and Tamil Languages):
“If in the four different languages of instruction we teach our children four different standards of right and wrong, four different ideal patterns of behaviour, then we will produce four different groups of people and there will be no integrated coherent society… What is in the balance is the very basis, the very foundations of our society. For if we are not to perish in chaos caused by antagonisms and prejudices between water-tight cultural and linguistic compartments, then you have to educate the right responses amongst our young people in the schools.” (MOE, 2007)
The bilingualism policy is introduced in 1966 where English is positioned as the language of technology and management while the Mother Tongue languages serve as carriers of cultural values where students can learn about their culture, identify with their ethnic roots, and to preserve cultural traits and Asian values. English language not only serves as the bridge amongst the ethnic groups, it is recognised as “our window on the world…the fact that most Singaporeans speak English is a major competitive advantage for us (Singapore)… English is the lingua franca of our age”, acknowledged by then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (MIA, 1999).
Globalization
Globalization is widely seen as a process – interaction and integration amongst people and different entities of the society beyond the country. Indeed, Globalization101 (The Levin Institute) pointed out that globalization started since mankind started to travel and trade with others beyond the borders. It is a continual process. However, with increasingly easy accessibility of technology, in particular, the internet, the definition and the impact of globalization has changed.
Impact from Technology Advancement
With technology advancement, globalization takes place in new dimensions and has created great impact. It has not only changed the operation protocol, but also affected areas and communities that were previously unaffected (or very minimally affected).
Technology has changed the mode of operation, extended the operation network and quickened the pace of change. People situated at different geographical locations are no longer limited by the physical constraint (accessibility) because they can now communicate and interact in the borderless virtual world, via online social network community anytime, anywhere. Information that took months to arrive in the past is now almost immediately available via the internet through platforms like email, Twitter and Facebook. Words no longer just spread through mouths. Words reach an unimaginable audience size very rapidly. This has changed the way people receive and react to information as long as they are connected to the Internet.
People become increasingly technologically savvy and are now more exposed to other sources of information, to a large extent unlimited and uncontrollable compared to the past. While the government could impose measures to ‘officially’ manage the accessibility of selected online information, it is a definite losing battle as the technology savvy communities are resourceful and would always find means to overcome the constraints.
Influences from the media have inevitable impact on people’s perspectives, attitudes and even value system. Media could not be merely managed by regulations on the use. It would not be effective. It is best managed through education to inculcate the desired set of values and attitude.
Demographic Changes
Push and pull factors resulting from globalization have bring about significant demographic changes to both developed and developing countries over time. Creation of new international markets, economic opportunities to seek for better livelihood, quality education are some common causes to the movement. When people move, they bring with them their ‘identity’, culture and value system. As a result of this continuous massive movement of people across the globe, the national identity of the country could evolve over time as a noticeable number of immigrants move in and stay on.
The observable changes as a result of globalization are not limited to just impact of technology and demographic. In the 2004, the Business & Economics Advisor (BERA, 2004) reported that globalization also has an impact on governance, how national and international laws govern the economic activity and transnational institutions. There is also noticeable increase in the integration and interdependence in all areas of economic life as well as increasing exchange of products and services across national borders through trade.
Impact on the building of the Singaporean Identity
In 1999, then Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong explicitly pointed out that Singapore’s position to remain a multi-racial country: “One visible manifestation of our multi-racial policy is the way we have encouraged immigration of foreign talent. Attracting talent is a crucial policy which must continue whatever the state of the economy.” (MIA, 1999)
He added, “Our immigration policy is multi-racial. We seek talent regardless of race or origin, provided they can make a contribution to Singapore. Happily, overall we have been quite successful… These new arrivals have done well, and many of their children are distinguishing themselves in our schools. In time, from among them we will find talent who will enrich the community and contribute to Singapore, as our own immigrant forefathers did” (MIA, 1999).
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also highlighted in the 2004 National Day Rally speech on the need of Singaporeans to in play an active role to manage the challenges arises from globalization “…to continue growing and the answer is, well, we’ve got to continue to restructure, we’ve got to continue to upgrade… it’s a worldwide trend because of globalization.. there is ferocious competition…” (PMO, 2004)
Response to Global Changes in the Teaching Profession
In response to the changes in the global landscape, then Education Minister Tharman Shanmugarathnam expressed the need to “work harder to keep a sense of shared identity amongst our citizens and keep our society cohesive” when Singaporeans get exposed to and even bombarded with alternative views, ideologies and lifestyles”. (Network Conference, 2007) (Nexus, 2010)
He further emphasized the need to “nurture a sense of shared future and to stay on even keel in an uncertain and divisive world… It is what you and I feel and what our young feel about this country, the values and qualities of society that we hold dear and the contributions we make to society that will write the next chapter of the Singapore Story.” (Network Conference, 2007) (Nexus, 2010)
Teachers’ Readiness
Armed with the beliefs that if students, from young, are imbued with the right attitudes and values, they will grow up to become good and responsible citizens and that teachers play a very pivotal role in shaping the young minds, all teachers-to-be undergo an NE programme to prepare them to role model and promote NE in schools. Every teacher would be aware that
· NE is an integral part of the teacher’s mission and responsibility.
This is reflected in the Pledge by Teachers:
We, the teachers of Singapore, pledge that:
We will be true to our mission to bring about the best in our pupils.
We will be exemplary in our discharge of our duties and responsibilities.
We will guide our pupils to be good and useful citizens of Singapore.
We will continue to learn and pass on the love of learning to our pupils.
We will win the trust, support and cooperation of parents and the community
So as to enable us to achieve our mission
· Every teacher has a stake in the success of NE, and
· Every teacher must show commitment to NE by taking ownership of ways of integrating NE.
To translate the above into action, all teachers-to-be would complete the module, “NE Experience” which include
· Completing a core module “Social Context of Teaching and Learning where NE content and issues are introduced, reflected upon and discussed.
· Learning to infuse NE across various subject disciplines, where teachers have a better appreciation and understanding of how NE issues and values can be incorporated into their specific content areas.
· Attending a NE-related seminar which addresses the vital role that teachers play in inculcating NE values in their students. It also provides opportunities to clarify issues with ‘experts’ (from MOE’s NE Branch), discuss and share different perspectives on issues and understand differences.
· Visiting Singapore Armed Forces Camp. The purpose is to introduce to teachers, first hand, the capability and readiness of the armed forces so that teachers could communicate their confidence of our defence forces to defend our country.
Cultural Inclusivity in schools
Cultural inclusion is based on the belief that people should learn, grow and work with others of similar and diverse cultural backgrounds in regular school, work and community environments. Becoming culturally inclusive would mean looking and assessing situations in the positive light instead of seeing from the negative perspectives (L and Tan, A.G. (2003).
In schools, students of diverse backgrounds attend lessons and participate in activities together; diversity in terms of their ethnic, racial, religious, linguistic or cultural difference. Within schools, culturally inclusive communities are built where students understand and appreciate cultural diversity as well as feel a sense of belonging and community with fellow students of other cultures and races.
The creation of such community is also in response to the global changes and impact, which further emphasize on the importance to value difference and uphold racial and religious harmony, where different races and cultures have school, live and work together.
Lim, L and Tan, A.G. (2003) suggested schools to adopt A Pedagogy for Difference where individuals from diverse backgrounds are given the space to interact, dialogue and learn about, learn from, and learn with others who are different, to jointly produce or co-construct new identities and new possibilities. The notion of cultural inclusion in Singapore is “not simply on accommodation of differences but on the production of difference that is grounded and formed in the interaction between the different races and cultures.
Below are the guidelines proposed by Lim, L and Tan, A.G. (2003):
· Acknowledge that schooling is only one significant source of education (and acculturation)
· Recognise that every class of students represents a unique sampling of local cultural diversity
· Include cultural knowledge as part of classroom knowledge
· Emphasis self and cultural awareness
· Promote sharing of cultural knowledge among students
· Work at challenging stereotypes and reducing prejudice
· Make learning as experiential as possible
· Practice qualities and virtues necessary for a gracious, just and equitable society
Conclusion
As a young nation, the country’s effort to seek clarity to strengthen the Singaporean identity is an on-going process. Diversity is a ‘given’ condition when the Singapore started its journey of nation building. Instead of advocating assimilation, the government chooses to focus its effort to bring the nation forward (in response the changing global landscape). On the other hand, concerted effort is put in to ensure its people live as “one people” yet rooted to their ethnic cultures. Multi-layered approach is adopted, at policy level, in institutions as well as the community level. All in all, the country holds the belief that
“by strengthening our shared cultural DNA, we will bond more closely together as one nation.”, said ex-Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the Network Conference in 2003 (Nexus, 2010) .
No comments:
Post a Comment