Inclusion, exclusion, and racial identity in Singapore’s language education system
July 20, 2021
Communal riots broke out on 21st July 1964 in Singapore, marking the start of race-based civil disturbances on the island. The government responded by imposing island wide curfews and deploying military and police personnel to maintain law and order. The 1964 riots remind Singaporeans of the importance of racial and religious harmony in multiracial and multireligious Singapore. Racial Harmony Day is commemorated on 21st July annually, creating a platform for Singaporeans to engage in cross-cultural exchange, and reminding us of the need to preserve racial harmony in the country.
Communal riots broke out on 21st July 1964 in Singapore, marking the start of race-based civil disturbances on the island. The government responded by imposing island-wide curfews and deploying military and police personnel to maintain law and order. The 1964 riots remind Singaporeans of the importance of racial and religious harmony in multiracial and multi-religious Singapore. Racial Harmony Day is commemorated on 21st July annually, creating a platform for Singaporeans to engage in cross-cultural exchange, and reminding us of the need to preserve racial harmony in the country.
The multi-ethnic population of Singapore speaks a wide range of second languages, of which only three hold official status: Mandarin, Malay, and Tamil. In ‘Inclusion, exclusion, and racial identity in Singapore’s language education system’ (International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2019), Associate Professor Rebecca Starr and Associate Professor Mie Hiramoto (both of NUS Department of English Language and Literature) consider the sociolinguistic effects that have arisen in connection with Singapore’s Mother Tongue (MT) education policy, and the policy’s role in promoting both inclusion and exclusion within the island state.
The article explores the historical nature of the Chinese, Malay, Indian, and Other (CMIO) ethnic grouping from colonial through to post-Independence times, and its continuity within the MT education policy implemented on the eve of Independence in 1965. The primary rationale put forward for the MT policy was ostensibly to instill Asian values and provide a continued connection for the various groupings to their cultural heritage. The text uncovers certain areas of expansion, such as the addition of French, Japanese, and five additional Indian languages to the policy, but a reluctance to include certain other languages such as Hokkien, Cantonese, as well as the creole languages of Baba Malay and Kristang.
The co-authors apply the framework that race and ethnicity are social constructs rather than biological realities, and both their preliminary research and quantitative data appear to back this up. Their survey results reveal an uneven link between satisfaction and cultural identity among Singaporeans with their assigned MT language.
Whilst those of Malay and Indian heritage demonstrated the highest levels of satisfaction, respondents with Chinese backgrounds, as well as those of Eurasian, Peranakan, and other mixed heritage indicated varying levels of disconnect with their assigned MTs.
The study concludes with two possible futures for the MT policy. One trajectory is the steady expansion to incorporate the currently non-approved Southern Chinese and creole languages; the second a gradual breakup of the link between compulsory second language education and ethnic heritage.
Read the full article here.