A vision for a society of equals
Soh Yi Da
This week, one of my girlfriends sparked a spirited discussion among our group of close friends when she asked how difficult it would be to get her boys into a brand-name primary school.
The 15 of us were educated in two related all-boys and all-girls secondary schools which have affiliated primary schools.
Several ideas were aired, ranging from how she should buy or rent a property near the school or do volunteer work.
What underpinned the conversation was this: that which primary school our children went to is of utmost importance, because an affiliation with an established secondary school would make it easier to gain entry, and from then on, our children would pretty much be set up for life.
What struck me about the conversation was how it juxtaposed with a vision outlined by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam recently in an interview with Singapolitics on the Singapore of the future.
He declared that how you did in school at 18 should not define your life. Singapore in 20 years should be a society where people treat each other as equals, regardless of their education or job.
This is a noble vision, but taking the group as a microcosm of the wider society, the entrenched mindsets on what defines success - and what gets you there - looks set to be a huge obstacle.
One friend remarked during the discussion that her friends outside the group listening in would label it as rather elitist.
Then came back one retort: “I’d rather be stereotyped as elitist than an ‘Ah Lian’”.
This ‘them versus us’ syndrome was highlighted by Mr Tharman too. He said there were two groups now – one who does well and are aware of their strengths but not those of others, and another who are aware of their weaknesses and have not discovered their strengths. Loosely, we could call them the elite and non-elite.
This division also permeates the working world, where certain jobs in the services or vocational sector, for example, are shunned and looked down upon by others in the PME category. (A fundamental reason why we need foreigners to do the jobs Singaporeans shun.)
What has created this?
Mr Tharman points to a combination of the legacy of the British system, which is elitist, and the Chinese culture which emphasises academic qualifications and largely defines success by wealth.
I recall that throughout my education, academic success was held up as the hallmark of achievement.
We were led to believe that scholarships, a great career and success in life would follow once we got into a good school and got good grades.
I believed it so much that when my A level results fell short of 4 straight ‘As’ but were decent by any standard, I cried all the way back to the office where I was interning. I was told off by a mentor then: “You’ll see in a few years’ time that how you do today will not matter as long as you work hard.”
I understand what he means now and am embarrassed by my behaviour. I have met many people in the time since who have been far more successful, who didn’t go to good schools or got good grades, and who deserve more respect.
The problem is this narrow definition of what constitutes success – and the stigma it attaches to those outside this definition – is still rampant among parents, students and teachers alike.
The goverment also feeds this - public sector scholarships, for example, are overwhelmingly given to students from the top five junior colleges. They become the well-paid technocrats who run the country and formulate policies, and they, along with their classmates who do well in the private sector, send their children to the same institutions, and the cycle continues.
This is not to suggest that brand-name schools are currently impenetrable to those outside some sort of inner circle nor that failure to secure a place limits how far someone can go on the social mobility ladder. The worry is that because so many people believe that getting into a brand-name school confers such a significant advantage, those inside might erect obstacles for others who want to get in, and think less of those who are not part of it.
Ultimately, we must guard against letting the best build a fortress around themselves. The elite should not become elitist.
Ensuring this can start with the education system, but beyond that, Singaporeans must want to embrace this vision too, because it is the right thing to do.
I am optimistic that it is a matter of time - that as our society matures, people will become more enlightened and gracious; that collective peer pressure would shame someone who looked down on another just they have a lower-paying job; and that people will stop asking ‘which secondary school are you from?’ as a way of defining someone.
By articulating his vision, Mr Tharman has put this issue into the national discourse – the first step on this journey.
It is now up to us to digest it, talk about it and then internalise it. Who knows, we might arrive there in less than 20 years.